ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Abandoned Vehicles

Sydney Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many abandoned vehicles were removed by local authorities in England in (a) 2001–02, (b) 2002–03 and (c) 2003–04.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 May 2004
	The number of abandoned vehicles removed by local authorities in England was as follows:
	
		
			  Number of vehicles recovered by local authorities 
		
		
			 2001–02 284,400 
			 2002–03 298,900 
		
	
	Note:
	Figures for 2003–2004 will be available in early 2005

Disposable Nappies

Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 6 May, Official Report, column 1658W, on disposable nappies, whether the Waste Implementation Programme Manager met representatives of the Nappy Alliance at Ashdown House on 23rd March; and if she   will make a statement on the outcome of the meeting.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 20 May 2004
	I can confirm that the Waste Implementation Programme (WIP) Manager met with representatives of the Nappy Alliance on 23rd March. The meeting was a useful opportunity to discuss the work WIP is already taking forward through the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) to promote re-usable nappies. This work stream forms an essential part of Government's renewed drive to minimise the amount of household waste generated in England.
	One of the issues raised in the course of the meeting was the need to ensure that this element of Defra's waste strategy has full support across Government. In particular, this means working closely with the Department of Health to ensure that hospitals are in a position to encourage the supply of re-usable nappies, and that healthcare professionals give new parents the facts they need to make their own informed choice. Following the meeting on 23 March and the subsequent publication of the Women's Environmental Network's report 'Nappies and the NHS: Waste Prevention and a Fair Choice for Parents', I have written to the Under-Secretary at the Department of Health to make the case for a strong lead from hospitals and health trusts on this important initiative.

Farm Income

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list the (a) crops, (b) vegetables, (c) fruit and (d) plants the growing of which will not qualify for single farm payment.

Alun Michael: Under the Single Payments Scheme, farmers will be allocated 'entitlements' against which they may make an annual claim for payment. Such claims must be supported by an equivalent number of hectares of agricultural area, except those used for forestry, permanent crops (eg fruit trees) or used for non-agricultural activities.
	In addition, the amount of land used in support of a claim on which horticultural crops (those referred to in   Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No. 2200/96 and Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No. 2201/96 and potatoes other than those intended for manufacture of potato starch) are grown will be limited by authorisations allocated to individual growers.

Flooding

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for   Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations she has received regarding the recent increased assessment of flood risk in the South East; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: The Government welcome the report "Foresight Future Flooding" by Professor Sir David King published through the Office of Science and Technology on 22 April.
	Currently nearly two million properties are at risk of flooding in the UK from rivers and the sea and a further 80,000 are at risk from heavy downpours that overwhelm drains in urban areas. Under future scenarios in the report and assuming our approval to flood risk management does not change then annual damages could rise substantially by the 2080s. The areas at greatest risk include the South East Coast. We therefore face major challenges in managing these potential risks and associated costs.
	The Government are considering the implications of the report and we intend to address the findings in an initial response through a consultation document for a new flood and coastal defence strategy that I hope to publish in the summer.
	Each major stakeholder is committed to delivering a number of actions and my Department will oversee progress.

Greenhouse Gases

David Chaytor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will request the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Subsidiary Bodies to undertake an exploratory study of contraction and convergence as a potential basis for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 17 May 2004
	The UK, as part of the EU, sought to open a technical dialogue on possible approaches to long-term action to tackle climate change at the UN climate change negotiations in Milan last December. The aim was to begin technical discussions on different methodologies, including contraction and convergence, to promote better understanding of the challenge facing the international community.
	We achieved recognition of better access to data and analytical tools relevant to implementing commitments under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, plus a scoping phase to develop a shared data interface to help with this, and a process to exchange further views on these issues in July 2004. The UK will continue to press for technical discussions relevant to the assessment of different methodologies.
	Negotiations on climate change action beyond the end of the first Kyoto Protocol commitment period in 2012 are due to commence in 2005. In the meantime, we will continue to exchange views informally with other countries on how to promote further action.

Hazardous Waste

Sue Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to use BSE and foot and mouth disposal facilities for the handling of hazardous waste.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 10 May 2004
	We have no plans to use such facilities for the handling of hazardous waste. Sites for handling hazardous waste would have to have the appropriate authorisations under the Waste Framework Directive and the Landfill Directive. The disposal by burial of animal carcases during the FMD epidemic was subject to control under the Animal Waste Directive which has now been superseded by the EU Animal By-Products Regulation. BSE infected carcases are disposed of by incineration in approved incinerators.

Household Waste

Humfrey Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will impose a statutory obligation on local authorities to ensure weekly collections of household waste.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 18 May 2004
	We have no plans to require local authorities to collect household waste on a weekly basis.
	Decisions on the frequency of collection are a matter for each local authority, which needs to have in place a collection regime which enables it to meet its statutory duties in a way which is consistent with Best Value and takes full account of local circumstances.

Hunting

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what research the Department is undertaking into the impact of land used for hunting under the single farm payment;
	(2)  what discussions she has had with the (a) Countryside Alliance and (b) Master of Foxhounds on the impact of the single farm payment on hunting; and whether this will qualify as an activity which will derive payments under the new scheme.

Alun Michael: I am not aware of any research or discussions with any organisations on an inter-relationship between hunting and the new Single Payment Scheme. Hunting is not an activity that would attract payment under the Scheme, but agricultural land on which hunting takes place may be used by a farmer in support of a Single Payment claim if that activity does not lead to a breach any of the Scheme's conditions, including the obligation on the farmer to maintain the land in good agricultural and environmental condition.

Insects

David Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in what ways she proposes that agri-environment schemes will contribute to maintaining the UK's biodiversity, with particular reference to insects.

Elliot Morley: We regularly monitor our existing Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) and Countryside Stewardship (CS) schemes to assess their environmental benefits. This has demonstrated substantial benefits for many Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats and species, including mammals, birds, plants and insects.
	Recent Defra-sponsored research has shown that simple measures such as planting a seed mix of flowers in field margins to provide pollen and nectar can attract huge numbers of insects (bumble bees, butterflies, and others) relative to the in-field crop. Full details are available at http://www.f-e-c.co.uk/Buzz/index.htm.
	Defra has also sponsored specific research on butterflies. This has shown that ESAs and CS schemes are slowing, and in some cases reversing, the long-term decline in numbers of England's rarer butterflies. Further details are available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2002/020806a.htm.
	Recent Defra-funded reports on 'Managing priority habitats for invertebrates' will help inform targeting and formulating of future agri-environment agreements. 'Environmental Stewardship' (ES) will rationalise and replace ESAs and CS in 2005. ES will be divided into two levels: an Entry Level (ELS) and a Higher Level (HLS). ELS should include measures beneficial for biodiversity, including insects, in the wider countryside. The HLS Scheme will continue the work of ESAs and CS by targeting management on the most valuable and vulnerable farmland habitats. The options available under these new schemes will also have the advantage of having greater generic benefits for insects. Further details of these schemes can be found at http://www.defra.gov.uk/erdp/reviews/agrienv/entrylevel.htm and http://www.defra. gov.uk/erdp/reviews/agrienv/higherlevel.htm.

Methyl Bromide

Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the policy of Her Majesty's Government is on the use of methyl bromide in farm and food production.

Elliot Morley: Methyl bromide is an ozone depleting substance and its production and supply are controlled under the Montreal Protocol. Its production is due to be phased out in developed countries after 31 December 2004, except for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes.
	In addition, under the Protocol and the equivalent EC legislation, methyl bromide can be authorised for "critical uses" after 2004, including use in relation to farming and food production.
	The Government's view is that methyl bromide is being phased out by the Protocol and should not be phased back in by excessive critical uses. Every effort should be made therefore to identify possible alternatives to methyl bromide use in relation to farm and food production.

Oil Care Campaign

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the progress of the Oil Care Campaign in halving the number of oil pollution incidents in the United Kingdom by 2005.

Elliot Morley: The Oil Care Campaign is a voluntary initiative which brings together the oil industry, regulators, local authorities and other stakeholders with an interest in reducing the number and severity of oil pollution incidents affecting inland waters in the UK. It does not have any specific target for the reduction in incidents.
	In relation to oil pollution incidents in England and Wales, figures for the last three years provided by the Environment Agency were deposited in the House of Commons Library in January 2004.

Radioactive Waste

David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for   Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which (a) Government Departments and (b) external organisations are responsible for the long-term management of high-level radioactive waste.

Elliot Morley: High-level waste (HLW) is held and managed by British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL) at its Sellafield site and by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) at its Dounreay site. Responsibility for this HLW is due to be taken over by the new Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) when it comes into being in April 2005. Government sponsorship of both the nuclear industry and the NDA is the responsibility of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Radioactive waste management policy is the joint responsibility of The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), and the devolved Administrations for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The main nuclear site regulators are the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the environment agencies (the Environment Agency (EA) in England and Wales and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) in Scotland) and the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS).

Refrigerants

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what quantity of (a) chlorofluorocarbons, (b) hydrochlorofluorocarbons and (c) hydrofluorocarbons have been recovered from equipment other than domestic refrigerators in each year since 1995.

Elliot Morley: The information requested is not available, as the data on the recovery of these substances do not distinguish the equipment from which they were recovered.

Single Farm Payments

David Curry: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on what basis the single farm payment will be established for farmers who were in the dairy sector prior to the foot and mouth disease outbreak whose flocks were slaughtered because of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease and who restocked with (a) dairy cows and (b) beef and sheep.

Alun Michael: Dairy farmers whose flocks were slaughtered because of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease, and who restocked with:
	(a) dairy cows will be able to claim entitlements whose initial value will be based on the milk quota available on their holding on 31 March 2005.
	(b) beef and sheep before 29 September 2003 will be able to claim entitlements from the National Reserve.

Sustainable Development

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what definition of sustainable development has been agreed for application across Government; and what mechanism is in place to ensure that the term is applied and claimed appropriately.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 30 April 2004
	The UK Government's current sustainable development strategy "A better quality of life", launched in May 1999, describes sustainable development as 'ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for generations to come'. It also refers to a widely used international definition, from the Brundtland Report of the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development, of
	'development which meets the need of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs'.
	Government publications usually refer to the 'better quality of life' description as given in our 1999 Strategy. Examples would include the departmental sustainable development strategies for the Department of Health, the Department for Trade and Industry and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and HM Treasury's 2002 Spending Review Report.
	We are currently consulting, in partnership with the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and Northern Ireland, to develop new sustainable strategy for the UK. As part of this we are reviewing our explanation of what sustainable development means.

Two Tree Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list (a) the works and (b) the cost of works on (i) Canvey Island's sea defences and (ii) Two Tree Island which are envisaged; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: Decisions on which projects are promoted and their timing rests with the operating authorities.
	(i) Canvey Island's Sea Defences
	Defra is not aware of any proposals for works to Canvey Island's tidal defences. The tidal flood defences around the Island are regularly monitored by the Environment Agency.
	(ii) Two Tree Island
	Southend borough council has recently secured planning permission for coast protection works around the south and northeast sides of the Island. The works are estimated to cost around £1 million and are due to be submitted for Defra grant aid consideration under the Coast Protection Act.

Two Tree Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the increased risk of flooding to Canvey Island; and what (a) research and (b) action she plans to take in the light of the increased assessment of flooding risk.

Elliot Morley: Decisions on which projects are promoted and their timing rests with the operating authorities.
	The Environment Agency has been researching the need for capital renewal of the internal flood defences on Canvey Island and a draft Project Appraisal Report is due to be presented to the Agency's National Review Group during this summer.
	Works will include the upgrading of all 12 land-drainage pumping stations on the Island. The works programme will take approx. 3 years and cost up to £6 million.
	Since the 1980s the Department has provided guidance to operating authorities to make allowance for climate change in the planning and appraisal of new and replacement flood and coastal defence works. This guidance has been regularly reviewed in the light of the latest research findings and supplementary guidance was most recently issued in 2003. The aim is to take a suitably precautionary approach while not diverting funds unnecessarily from the solution of problems that affect people today. The approach and guidance will be further reviewed for the new Strategy for Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management.

Two Tree Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether she has assessed the case for closing beaches in the vicinity of Two Tree Island as a result of the pollution from the old waste dump.

Elliot Morley: The closure of beaches is a matter for local authorities. Local authorities are advised by the Environment Agency on prevailing water quality levels. The nearest designated bathing beach is at Leigh Bell Wharf which met the EU guideline standards in 2003 and is classed as 'excellent' quality.

Warm Zones

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what funding has been allocated in (a) 2004–05, (b) 2005–06 and (c) in total to Warm Zones.

Elliot Morley: The Government provided £1 million funding for the pilot programme of five Warm Zones to run from 2001–04.
	An independent evaluation of the pilots is being carried out by the Energy Saving Trust on behalf of the Department to assess the effectiveness of Warm Zones.
	No additional funding has been allocated to Warm Zones by the Government.

World Oceans Day

David Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action her Department will be taking to mark World Oceans day on 8 June.

Elliot Morley: Around the time of World Oceans day Defra plans to publish an updated delivery plan setting out the steps that the Government are taking to achieve the conservation and sustainable management of marine and coastal biodiversity and to promote better oceans governance and partnership initiatives, in line with the commitments made at the World Summit on Sustainable Development.
	To help progress this delivery plan the UK, together with EU partners, will be calling for the United Nations to take urgent action to protect vulnerable marine biodiversity in areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction at the forthcoming meeting of the United Nations Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea. World Oceans day coincides with this meeting.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Department Branding

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much his Department spent on branding the Department between 1997–98 and 2003–04, broken down by (a) consultancy fees, (b) design and orders for new stationery, (c) website design and (d) other material featuring new logos.

Fiona Mactaggart: The Home Office logo has not been subject to redesign in 2003–04, but in the previous years you refer to, work was undertaken. The logo was redesigned to ensure the Home Office work was clear to the public and stakeholders.
	Costs involved were as follows:
	(a) and (b) research, project management and design and orders for new stationery—£147,505.06.
	(c) website design—£18,024.50.
	(d) The logo element of 'other material featuring new logos between 1997–98 and 2003–04' would be covered in individual project/publication/media initiatives and were not funded by or attributed to the corporate logo change initiative.
	No costs were written off due to lack of use or destruction of materials featuring previous logos, as the low levels of old stock continued to be used.

Departmental Response Times

David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average length of time was for a substantive response by his Department to (a) written questions, (b) hon. Members' written correspondence and (c) public correspondence in 2003–04.

David Blunkett: The last published performance figures for the Home Office showed that 37 per cent. of all parliamentary questions and 56 per cent. of Members written correspondence were answered within parliamentary deadlines. I have been very clear this is not acceptable and needs to be substantially improved.
	As a result, last year the Department introduced a new correspondence tracking system and in the last few months our performance in meeting the targets for answering Members written correspondence to Ministers increased substantially. In relation to parliamentary questions, we are currently in the process of introducing a new system, the electronic Parliamentary Questions System (ePQS) tobetter monitor and manage the Department's performance.
	In relation to public correspondence, we are currently looking at how to improve the tracking and monitoring of performance across the Department. Figures are not currently available except at disproportionate cost.

Immigration Appeals

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the   consequences of delays in dealing with cases of appeals against withdrawal of United Kingdom nationality before the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.

Des Browne: To date only one appeal against withdrawal of United Kingdom nationality has been   lodged with the Special Immigration Appeals Commission. The administrative process for such appeals is subject to continuous review to ensure compatibility with both the public interest and the independent appeals process.

Immigration Appeals

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 10 May to Question reference 169812, what the reasons are for the delay in making progress with appeals over the exercise of his powers concerning removal of nationality and indefinite leave to remain.

David Lammy: I have been asked to reply.
	The Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) has one appeal before it in relation to Deprivation of Citizenship proceedings. Such cases involve significant and complex evidence and require due consideration of public funding applications. Importantly, as with any appeal, parties need to be available and prepared to proceed. The timetable for the resolution of cases is necessarily a function of all these factors The administrative processes for appeals against Deprivation of Citizenship proceedings are subject to ongoing review to ensure compatibility with both the public interest and the independence of the judicial process.

TRANSPORT

Railways

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the Answer of 22 April 2004, Official Report, column 651W, how many of the Department of Transport's PFI projects listed on the Treasury website met the criteria for special purpose vehicles set out in the Strategic Rail Authority's strategic plan.

Tony McNulty: None of the Department for Transport projects listed on the Treasury website falls within the remit of the Strategic Rail Authority. The Highways Agency is responsible for the strategic roads, Vehicle and Operator Services Agency for the MOT privatisation, Transport for London for London Underground and the Docklands Light Rail projects and the relevant local authority for the other light rail, local roads and street lighting PFI projects.
	The selection criteria used to assess special purpose vehicles tendering for transport projects varies to take account of the nature of the work, the project size and duration.
	The legal, economic, financial and technical information required is set out in the contract advert in the Official Journal of the European Union. The information requested complies with Office of Government Commerce advice, departmental procedures and Treasury guidance on Private Finance Initiative practice.

Railways

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of the Network Rail Volume Incentive; and if he will make a statement.

Alistair Darling: The 'Volume Incentive' was first introduced by the Rail Regulator in his Access Charges Review 2000. The SRA set out its views on the continuing effectiveness of a Volume Incentive for Network Rail as part of its response to the Initial Consultation Paper of the Access Charge Review 2003. The SRA's view was that for a number of reasons, the Volume Incentive would no longer be cost effective or appropriate given the changes to the industry since it was first introduced. The Rail Regulator considered this view and the supporting reasons, along with the views of other consultees, in the course of the Access Charge Review 2003. His view was that the Volume Incentive would continue to be an effective way of encouraging Network Rail to make efficient use of a constrained network so that additional traffic could be accommodated. He therefore retained the Volume Incentive, with a number of modifications (including only rewarding Network Rail for growth above a certain threshold level) in the Final Conclusions to the Access Charge Review published in December 2003. This decision is entirely for the Rail Regulator, taking into account his statutory duties as set out in the Railways Act .1993.

Railways

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will place in the Library a copy of the (a) Strategic Rail Authority's submission to the rail regulator in December 2002 that the Network Rail Volume Incentive be removed and (b) the Rail Regulators' response.

Alistair Darling: The documents referred to are available from the Office of the Rail Regulator's website at the following address:
	(a) http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/ir2-sra.pdf
	(b) http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/162.pdf
	The Final Conclusions from the Access Charge Review 2003 and other related documents are also available from this website.

Railways

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to his answer of 12 May 2004, Official Report, column 410W, on railways, what operational performance trajectory was set for the train operating companies between December 2003 and November 2004; and what the current performance is against that target.

Alistair Darling: The performance trajectory, developed by the National Task Force on behalf of the rail industry, consists of Network Rail's performance forecasts and Train Operating Companies (TOC) performance plans. The trajectory is the industry's own internal performance monitoring process and will be reviewed in October 2004.
	TOC performance statistics are published quarterly by the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) in "National Rail Trends", the most recent edition of which was published in March 2004. Copies of "National Rail Trends" are placed in the House of Commons Library and published on the SRA's web site.

Railways

Lawrie Quinn: To ask the Secretary of State for   Transport what international models of railway safety he has considered in the context of the Rail Review.

Tony McNulty: The rail review is considering several international models of railway safety in the course of its work.

Railways

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what criteria his Department is using to evaluate options for reorganising the structure of the railways as part of the Rail Review.

Tony McNulty: As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport said in his statement to the House on 19 January2004, the principles for the review are that railways must operate in the public interest, maintain commitment to public and private partnership and maintain commitment to independent economic regulation.

Railways

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how he will ensure that rail safety continues to improve following changes arising from the Rail Review.

Tony McNulty: The European Railway Safety Directive requires that member states ensure that railway safety is generally maintained and, where reasonably practicable, continuously improved.

Railways

Michael Clapham: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will ensure that the recommendations from Lord Cullen's public inquiry following the Ladbroke Grove rail accident are fully delivered following changes arising from the Rail Review.

Tony McNulty: Lord Cullen recommended that the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) should review compliance with his public inquiry recommendations and publish the outcome of such reviews. The safety regulator will be expected to continue to review compliance following the rail review.

Blackpool Tram System

Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the regeneration effects of (a) proceeding and (b) not proceeding with the proposed upgrade of the Blackpool tram system.

Tony McNulty: The regeneration impacts of proceeding and not proceeding with the tramway upgrade were assessed in an Economic Impact Report provided by the promoters. The Department has not made its own assessment.

Bristol Airport

Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on proposals to expand the capacity of Bristol airport.

Tony McNulty: The Air Transport White Paper stated that the main potential for growth in the South West would be at Bristol Airport. We support the Airport's development to around 12 million passengers per annum to include a runway extension and new terminal south of the existing runway, when these are required, having due regard to the environmental impacts that would accompany its expansion.

Bus Users (London)

Paul Truswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the socio-economic breakdown of bus users in London.

Tony McNulty: The National Travel Survey provides the information for people aged 16 and over living in households in Great Britain for the period 1998–2000, according to their area of residence.
	The table shows the percentage of users in each socio-economic group, both inside and outside London. Note that tourists are not included in this breakdown:
	
		
			  All persons aged 16 and over Bus users(1) 
			 Socio-economic group (SEG) Inside London Outside London Inside London Outside London 
		
		
			 Professional/managerial 18 14 16 8 
			 Intermediate non-manual 12 9 12 8 
			 Junior non-manual 13 12 13 13 
			 Skilled manual 10 12 8 8 
			 Other manual/other SEGs 11 14 12 17 
			 Retired 21 27 23 30 
			 Other economically inactive 15 12 16 15 
			 All persons 100 100 100 100 
		
	
	(1) Use a local bus more than twice a year (in London this is 72 per cent. of all persons aged 16 and over and outside London it is 43 per cent.).

Car-Sharing

Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for   Transport what research his Department has undertaken into the (a) growth and (b) popularity of formal car-sharing through online systems.

Tony McNulty: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 13 May 2004, Official Report, column 490W.

Channel Tunnel Rail Link

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much clay will be produced as a result of excavations to build the new Channel Tunnel link station at Stratford; and how it is proposed to dispose of it.

Tony McNulty: About 270,000 cubic metres of clay have been excavated to form the station box at Stratford. The clay was deposited on the Stratford Lands, where the surface is being raised by about 6 m for the redevelopment of the lands.

Civil Servants

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many civil servants were employed by communication division in his Department on the last date for which figures are available.

Tony McNulty: As at 1 May 2004, the number of staff   employed in the Department's Communication Directorate was 73.1 (full time equivalents). This figure breaks down as follows:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 Director 1 
			 Press Officers 15 
			 Publications (print, publishing and external websites) 12 
			 Publicity (campaigns) 10.8 
			 Strategic Communications 8.8 
			 Internal Communications 9.5 
			 Business Management (finance, procurement, human   resources, IT, business and secretarial support) 16 
			 Total 73.1

Consultants and Advisers

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much his Department and its agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent on external consultants and advisers in each of the last three years.

Tony McNulty: Details of spend on external consultants and advisers by the central Department, agencies and non-departmental public bodies is shown in the following table.
	
		£ million
		
			  2001–02 2002–03 2003–04 
		
		
			 Central Department (2)— 122.2 58.5 
			 Highways Agency 179.8 157.5 169.7 
			 Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency 3.3 4.0 3.4 
			 Driving Standards Agency 1.2 4.2 4.0 
			 Vehicle and Operator Services Agency 2.8 3.3 3.0 
			 Vehicle Certification Agency 0.1 0.1 0.1 
			 Marine and Coastguard Agency 1.5 1.2 0.8 
			 Strategic Rail Authority 32.0 54.1 53.0 
			 Trinity House Lighthouse Service 0.3 0.5 1.0 
			 The Northern Lighthouse Service 0.1 0.1 0.1 
			 Total 221.1 347.2 293.6 
		
	
	(2) The Department was formed in May 2002. Figures for the central Department are not available for 2001–02 or prior years.

Light Rail

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  what assessment he has made of the levels of private sector investment in (a) commercial and (b) housing property along the lines of light rail routes in each year since 1997;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the effect that light rail systems have had on urban regeneration since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

Tony McNulty: The Department makes no annual assessment of the levels of private investment along light rail routes. The Department part funded a programme of research on the regeneration impacts of Sheffield Supertram which concluded in 1997. This showed little effect, however the tram only became fully operational in 1995 and any significant changes would be more gradual.

Rolling Stock Companies

Paul Truswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the (a) annual capital lease charge and (b) annual heavy maintenance charge made by rollng stock companies to train operators are for (i) a two carriage class 142 Pacer train, (ii) a two carriage class 143 Pacer train, (iii) a two carriage class 156 Sprinter train, (iv) a two carriage class 150 Sprinter train and (v) a four car class 333 train.

Tony McNulty: The rate to be paid for a particular type of rolling stock for use on a particular franchise is a commercial matter between the rolling stock owner and the train operator.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Education Funding

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in Chorley in each year between 1992 and 1997.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Chorley is a district of Lancashire Local Education Authority. The information for Lancashire LEA is as follows:
	
		£000
		
			  Total net current expenditure 
		
		
			 1992–93 649,469 
			 1993–94 594,252 
			 1994–95 596,785 
			 1995–96 583,921 
			 1996–97 590,313 
			 1997–98 600,316 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's RO1 statement submitted to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions.
	2. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
	3. In 1992–93 Net Current Expenditure after recharges was not collected on RO1. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.
	4. Figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to the local government reorganisation in 1998–99.

Education Funding

Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Heywood and Middleton in each of the last seven years.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Heywood and Middleton is a district of Rochdale local education authority. The information for Rochdale LEA is as follows:
	
		Net current expenditure per pupil -- £
		
			  Pre-Primary Education Primary Education Pre-Primary and Primary Education Secondary Education Special Schools 
		
		
			 1996–97 n/a n/a 1,800 2,605 12,959 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 1,841 2,658 13,211 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 1,952 2,685 13,276 
			 1999–2000 5,105 2,100 2,161 2,804 13,438 
			 2000–01 12,322 2,315 2,509 3,070 15,180 
			 2001–02 21,017 2,551 2,747 3,381 16,007 
			 2002–03 — — 2,793 — 3,690 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Rochdale LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
	7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Education Funding

James Purnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Stalybridge and Hyde in each of the last seven years.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Stalybridge and Hyde is a district of Tameside local education authority. The information for Tameside LEA is as follows:
	
		Net current expenditure per pupil -- £
		
			  Pre-Primary Education Primary Education Pre-Primary and Primary Education Secondary Education Special Schools 
		
		
			 1996–97 n/a n/a 1,743 2,304 12,097 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 1,779 2,449 12,876 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 1,929 2,528 13,371 
			 1999–2000 11,672 2,065 2,116 2,579 22,081 
			 2000–01 21,005 2,237 2,334 2,860 24,175 
			 2001–02 25,103 2,690 2,794 3,221 21,455 
			 2002–03 — 2,786 — 3,260 — 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Tameside LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's R01 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are adjusted to 2002–03 prices using the March 2004 GDP deflators.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
	7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Education Funding

Patrick McLoughlin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in the constituency of West Derbyshire between (a) 1992 and 1997, (b) 1997 and 2001 and (c) 2001 and 2004.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area West Derbyshire is a district of Derbyshire Local Education Authority. The latest information for Derbyshire LEA is contained in the following table. Information on the current year 2004–05 will not be available until the end of 2005.
	
		Net Current Expenditure
		
			  £ 
		
		
			 1992–93 to 1996–97 1,740,789 
			 1997–98 to 2000–01 1,104,187 
			 2001–02 to 2002–03 728,225 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Derbyshire LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–00 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Figures up to and including 1996–97 are for Derbyshire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1997–98 onwards Derbyshire LEA was split into Derbyshire and Derby LEAs. 1999–00 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
	4. In 1992–93 Net Current Expenditure after recharges was not collected on RO1. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.

Education Funding

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Birkenhead in each of the last seven years.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Birkenhead is a district of Wirral local education authority. The information for Wirral LEA is as follows:
	
		Net current expenditure per pupil
		
			  Pre-primary education Primary education Pre-primary and primary education Secondary education Special schools 
		
		
			 1996–97 n/a n/a 1,830 2,570 12,350 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 1,780 2,570 13,350 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 2,020 2,690 13,450 
			 1999–2000 20,060 2,120 2,220 2,850 15,100 
			 2000–01 28,700 2,360 2,510 3,060 16,180 
			 2001–02 34,050 2,680 2,850 3,420 18,400 
			 2002–03 — 2,980 — 3,760 — 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Wirral LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. All figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
	7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Education Funding

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Wirral, South in each of the last seven years.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Wirral, South is a district of Wirral local education authority. The information for Wirral LEA is as follows:
	
		Net current expenditure per pupil
		
			  Pre-primary education Primary education Pre-primary and primary education Secondary education Special schools 
		
		
			 1996–97 n/a n/a 1,830 2,570 12,350 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 1,780 2,570 13,350 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 2,020 2,690 13,450 
			 1999–2000 20,060 2,120 2,220 2,850 15,100 
			 2000–01 28,700 2,360 2,510 3,060 16,180 
			 2001–02 34,050 2,680 2,850 3,420 18,400 
			 2002–03 — 2,980 — 3,760 — 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Wirral LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. All figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
	7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Education Funding

Derek Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in the constituency of Sittingbourne and Sheppey between (a) 1992 and 1997, (b) 1997 and 2001 and (c) 2001 and 2004.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Sittingbourne and Sheppey is a district of Kent local education authority. The latest information available for Kent LEA is as follows.
	
		Net current expenditure
		
			  £000 
		
		
			 1992–93 to 1996–97 2,514,790 
			 1997–98 to 2000–01 2,138,194 
			 2001–02 to 2002–03 1,411,520 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Kent LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statements submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's R01 statement prior to then. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Figures up to and including 1997–98 are for Kent LEA prior to local government re-organisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Kent LEA became Rochester and Gillingham LEA.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
	4. In 1992–93 NCE after recharges was not collected on R01. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.

Education Funding

Peter Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Burnley in each of the last seven years.

David Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Burnley is a district of Lancashire local education authority. The information for Lancashire LEA is as follows:
	
		Net current expenditure per pupil -- £
		
			  Pre-Primary Education Primary Education Pre-Primary and Primary Education Secondary Education Special Schools 
		
		
			 1996–97 n/a n/a 1,805 2,594 15,988 
			 1997–98 n/a n/a 1,824 2,631 17,315 
			 1998–99 n/a n/a 2,002 2,701 17,768 
			 1999–00 7,130 2,108 2,173 2,763 18,487 
			 2000–01 11,033 2,326 2,437 2,914 18,768 
			 2001–02 16,391 2,629 2,797 3,230 20,597 
			 2002–03 — 2,898 — 3,399 — 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Up to 1997–98 figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Lancashire LEA became Blackpool and Blackburn LEAs.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
	7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Education Funding

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in the Lancashire Local Education Authority in each year since 1997.

David Miliband: The information requested is contained in the following table:
	
		Net Current Expenditure per pupil
		
			  Pre-primary Education Primary Education Pre-Primary and Primary Education Secondary Education Special Schools 
		
		
			 1997–98 (3)— (3)— 1,824 2,631 17,315 
			 1998–99 (3)— (3)— 2,002 2,701 17,768 
			 1999–2000 7,130 2,108 2,173 2,763 18,487 
			 2000–01 11,030 2,326 2,437 2,914 18,768 
			 2001–02 16,391 2,629 2,797 3,230 20,597 
			 2002–03 — 3,399 — — — 
		
	
	(3) Non Applicable
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–00 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–00. 1999–00 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Up to 1997–98 figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Lancashire LEA became Blackpool and Blackburn LEAs.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.

Education Services (Essex)

Alan Hurst: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many teachers were employed in state schools in (a) the County of Essex in each year from 1980 to 1997 and (b) the County of Essex and the unitary authorities of Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock in each year from 1998 to 2003.

David Miliband: The information is shown in the following tables. The first table shows the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) regular teachers in maintained schools in Essex LEA in each January between 1980 and 1998 1 . Data for 1987 are not available. The second table shows the number of FTE regular teachers in Essex, Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock LEAs after local government re-organisation in April 1998, in each January between 1999 and 2003.
	
		
			 Essex  
		
		
			 1980 13,080 
			 1981 13,040 
			 1982 12,820 
			 1983 12,640 
			 1984 12,440 
			 1985 12,620 
			 1986 12,000 
			 1987 — 
			 1988 12,390 
			 1989 12,190 
			 1990 12,360 
			 1991(5) 12,320 
			 1992 12,390 
			 1993 12,050 
			 1994 11,980 
			 1995 12,040 
			 1996 12,370 
			 1997 12,580 
			 1998 12,560 
		
	
	(4) Sixth form colleges are included up to 1992
	(5) Estimated
	
		
			  Essex Southend-on-Sea Thurrock Total 
		
		
			 1999 10,580 1,270 1,060 12,910 
			 2000 10,400 1,380 1,110 12,890 
			 2001 10,520 1,410 1,180 13,100 
			 2002 10,920 1,520 1,210 13,650 
			 2003 10,890 1,560 1,230 13,670 
		
	
	Source:
	Annual survey of teachers in service and teacher vacancies.

Essex Schools

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much it cost to educate a pupil in (a) primary and (b) secondary schools in Essex in 2003–04.

David Miliband: The latest date for which this information is available is 2002–03 and is given in the table. The information requested for 2003–04 will not be collected by the Department until October 2004 but I will write to the hon. Member when it is available.
	
		Net Current Expenditure per pupil
		
			  Primary Education Secondary Education 
		
		
			 2002–03 2,950 3,600 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The financial data are taken from Essex LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers.
	3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
	4. The NCE per pupil figures for primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained primary schools sector.
	5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
	6. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.

Further Education

Richard Spring: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills 
	(1)  what his projection is of funding for adult learning and skills provision by colleges of further education in rural areas;
	(2)  what funding provision is made for further education colleges in rural areas; and if he will make a statement.

Alan Johnson: The Department allocates funds to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) for the provision of education and training in the post-16 learning and skills sector. The Department does not provide a specific budget to the LSC for further education colleges in rural areas. The LSC decides on allocations at individual college and regional levels from the funds allocated to it for learning participation. Information about these allocations is not collected by the Department. This is a matter for the LSC. Mark Haysom, the Council's Chief Executive, will write to the Honourable Gentleman on this matter. A copy of his reply will be placed in the House Library. The Government have set out its investment plans for 2003–04 to 2005–06 which should enable the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) to increase funding for further education significantly.

Pre-schools

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to his answer of 17 May 2004, Official Report, column 705W, on pre-schools, what plans he has to make a degree qualification essential for teaching under-8s; and if he will make a statement.

David Miliband: All qualified teachers in maintained primary schools or non-maintained special schools will hold a first degree or equivalent qualification. Adults who are not qualified teachers and who do not necessarily have a degree qualification may also teach in such schools in specific circumstances set out in the Education (Specified Work and Registration) (England) Regulations 2003.

School Funding

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much capital money has been allocated to schools in Warrington, North in each year since 1997.

David Miliband: Since 2001 the majority of capital support has been allocated to schools and local education authorities by formula, and they decide how to invest it in line with their asset management plans. The Department does not, therefore, have complete information about capital investment at constituency level. This should be held at local authority level. Table A sets out the capital support made by the Department to Warrington local education authority (LEA) and its schools since 1998–99, in total and by programme.
	
		Table A: Capital allocations: Warrington local education authority. -- All figures in £000
		
			  1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 
		
		
			 Assistance with AMPs  27
			 Basic L C Vap49 276 
			 Basic Need 1,189 829 2,389 3,434 2,453 
			 Class Size initiative 347 1,261 282 640 176 
			 Condition1,040 1,517 
			 Devolved Formula   1,438 1,172 1,786 
			 Energy 62 
			 Modernisation (Primary)  
			 Modernisation LEA  
			 Modernisation LEA 611 
			 Modernisation VA 148 
			 NDS 2 1,083 
			 NDS 3  1,500
			 NDS 4   2,660   
			 Outside Toilets 56 
			 School Labs   149 149  
			 School Security 66 67 67 47 40 
			 Schools Access Initiative 69 100 140 229 298 
			 Secondary Learning Support Units   43 47 58 
			 Seed Challenge   152 167 274 
			 Specialist Schools   100  100 
			 Staff Workspace 60 
			 Supplementary Credit Approvals 193   503 219 
			 Supplementary NDS for VA Schools   116   
			 Voluntary Aided School Grant 207 438 505 584 630 
			 Total 3,272 4,222 8,041 8,061 8,646 
		
	
	So far Warrington LEA has also been allocated £10.2 million over the two years 2004–05 and 2005–06.

School/College Funding

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to equalise funding between schools and colleges for 16 to 19-year-olds in the Worthing area.

Alan Johnson: I refer the hon. Member to the reply   given to my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Rob Marris) on 14 May 2004, Official Report, column 623W.

Specialist Schools

Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for Education   and Skills if he will list the schools in England that have a specialist status in primary musical education.

David Miliband: Specialist school status is available for secondary (but not primary) maintained schools in England. Of the 259 secondary schools designated as specialist Arts Colleges, 181 are Performing Arts Colleges, providing an enhanced curriculum in music, dance and drama. Following the launch of the new Music specialism last year, the first two specialist Music Colleges (one of which is a combined Music and Mathematics and Computing College) will become operational in September 2004.
	Specialist schools must spend at least a third of their specialist school funding on delivering community development plans. These plans require schools to work in close partnership and to share enhanced facilities and curriculum expertise with a minimum of five other local schools—including feeder primary schools.
	In a separate initiative, in 2002, 42 primary schools were included in pilots, with subsequent evaluation by Ofsted, of models to widen opportunities for primary pupils to learn musical instruments. Earlier this year, I announced an extra £1.5 million for music services to help all authorities to develop their own models in this area.

Targeted Capital Fund

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will list the 23 voluntary-aided projects which were successful in their bids to the 2004–05 Targeted Capital Fund.

David Miliband: The details are as follows:
	
		£
		
			 School Name LEA Amount of BID (net cost) Purpose of Bid 
		
		
			 The Nottingham Bluecoat School Nottingham 1,728,100 New Accommodation 
			 Holy Trinity CE VA Primary School Calderdale 937,067 Replacement School 
			 Akiva School Barnet 6,758,100 New VA School 
			 Our Lady of the Visitation RC Primary School Ealing 1,012,712 Replacement Accommodation 
			 The Avenue School Brent 3,420,000 New VA School 
			 Hemingfield Ellis CE Primary School Barnsley 1,602,400 Replacement School 
			 Richard Challoner School Kingston upon Thames 4,306,781 Remodelling of School 
			 Holy Trinity School West Sussex 3,000,000 Expansion of School 
			 Montesorri School Brighton and Hove 3,736,000 New VA School 
			 St. Mary of the Angels Catholic Primary School Cheshire 1,828,444 Replacement School 
			 Four schools—reorganisation Devon 13,236,880 Reorganisation of four Schools 
			 St. Andrew CE Primary School Devon 1,812,000 Replacement School 
			 Larmenier and Sacred Heart RC Primary School Hammersmith and Fulham 5,285,345 Replacement School 
			 St. Gregory's Catholic Primary School Stoke-on-Trent 1,551,518 Extension to School 
			 Alderman Cogan's School Kingston upon Hull 1,015,120 Alterations to Existing School 
			 St. Bede's RC School North Lincolnshire 700,019 Independent Learning Centre 
			 Bethany Junior School Bournemouth 1,261,171 Remodelling and Improvements 
			 Notre Dame High School Norfolk 3,984,632 14–19 Excellence Centre 
			 St. George's School Hertfordshire 4,124,876 Growth in Pupil Numbers 
			 Sacred Heart RC Primary School Hillingdon 4,993,469 Growth in Pupil Numbers 
			 Ashlands Ecumenical Primary School North Somerset 2,072,171 Growth in Pupil Numbers 
			 St. George's Primary School North Somerset 2,072,171 Growth in Pupil Numbers 
			 Holy Trinity Catholic School Cornwall 2,790,000 Growth in Pupil Numbers

Teacher Training

Parmjit Dhanda: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what support his Department gives to UK citizens living abroad who would like to return to the UK in order to undertake teacher training.

David Miliband: Eligibility for support from public funds in respect of Bachelor of Education and Postgraduate Certificate in Education courses in England normally depends on whether or not a person is ordinarily resident in this country or the wider European Economic Area (EEA). Employment-based teacher training schemes, the largest of which is the Graduate Teacher Programme, offer an alternative route to Qualified Teacher Status which allows candidates to be employed in schools as unqualified teachers and paid accordingly while they train. Candidates who are not ordinarily resident in EEA country can take part in these programmes on exactly the same basis as those who are.

Teachers

Dave Watts: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimate the Government has made of the likely increase in salary costs of requiring all teachers to work up to the age of 60 years.

David Miliband: There is no existing or proposed requirement on teachers to work to the age of 60.

Vocational Training

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of the cohort of (a) 16, (b) 17, (c) 18, (d) 19, (e) 20 and (f) 21-year-olds (i) commenced and (ii) completed (A) NVQ level 3 courses and (B) modern apprenticeships in each year since 1992.

Alan Johnson: The proportions of 16 to 21-year-olds to have commenced either a NVQ level 3 in Learning and Skills Council (LSC) funded further education, an advanced apprenticeship or an apprenticeship in 2001/02 and 2002/03 are shown in the following table.
	
		Commencement rates of 16 to 21-year-olds on NVQ level 3 courses in LSC funded further education and on apprenticeships by programme and age—England: 2001/02 and 2002/03 -- Percentage
		
			 Programme/Age at 31 August 2001/02 2002/03 
		
		
			 NVQ 3 in LSC funded FE   
			 16 0.2 0.1 
			 17 0.6 0.6 
			 18 0.7 0.8 
			 19 0.4 0.5 
			 20 0.3 0.4 
			 21 0.3 0.4 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 0.4 0.5 
			
			 Advanced apprenticeships(6)  
			 16 1.6 1.4 
			 17 1.3 1.2 
			 18 1.5 1.3 
			 19 1.2 1.1 
			 20 1.0 0.8 
			 21 0.8 0.7 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 1.2 1.1 
			 Apprenticeships(7)   
			 16 5.3 5.2 
			 17 3.4 3.7 
			 18 2.6 2.8 
			 19 1.8 2.1 
			 20 1.3 1.5 
			 21 1.0 1.1 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 2.6 2.8 
			
			 All apprenticeships   
			 16 6.9 6.6 
			 17 4.7 4.9 
			 18 4.1 4.1 
			 19 2.9 3.2 
			 20 2.2 2.3 
			 21 1.8 1.9 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 3.8 3.8 
		
	
	Sources:
	LSC Individualised Learner Record
	LSC Individualised Student Record
	Office for National Statistics
	The proportions of 16 to 21-year-olds to have achieved either an NVQ level 3 qualification in LSC funded further education, or the NVQ component of an apprenticeship are shown in the following table.
	
		Achievements by 16 to 21-year-olds of NVQ level 3 courses in LSC funded further education and of NVQ components of apprenticeships as a proportion of the relevant age cohort by programme and age—England: 2001/02 and 2002/03 -- Percentage
		
			 Programme/Age at 31 August 2001/02 2002/03 3 
		
		
			 NVQ 3 in LSC funded FE   
			 16 — n/a 
			 17 0.3 n/a 
			 18 0.3 n/a 
			 19 0.2 n/a 
			 20 0.1 n/a 
			 21 0.1 n/a 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 0.2 n/a 
			
			 NVQ 3 component of an advanced apprenticeship(6) 
			 16 — — 
			 17 0.1 0.1 
			 18 0.5 0.4 
			 19 1.0 1.0 
			 20 0.9 1.0 
			 21 0.6 0.7 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 0.5 0.5 
			
			 NVQ 2 component of an apprenticeship(7) 
			 16 0.1 0.1 
			 17 1.3 1.3 
			 18 1.4 1.5 
			 19 0.9 1.1 
			 20 0.5 0.7 
			 21 0.4 0.5 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 0.7 0.9 
			
			 NVQ component of all apprenticeships 
			 16 0.1 0.1 
			 17 1.3 1.4 
			 18 1.8 1.9 
			 19 1.8 2.1 
			 20 1.4 1.6 
			 21 1.0 1.2 
			 All 16 to 21-year-olds 1.2 1.4 
		
	
	'—' = less than 0.05 per cent.
	Notes to tables:
	(6) Advanced apprenticeships were until recently known as advanced modern apprenticeships.
	(7) Apprenticeships were until recently known as foundation modern apprenticeships.
	(8) 2002/03 outcomes data for LSC funded further education are not yet available. 2002/03 outcomes data for apprenticeships are provisional.
	Sources:
	LSC Individualised Learner Record
	LSC Individualised Student Record
	Office for National Statistics
	Please note that direct comparisons should not be made between the proportions in the two tables as individual learners will have their programmes of learning delivered over different years. For example, some of the 17-year-olds to have commenced an NVQ 3 course in 2001/02 will finish as 17-year-olds in 2001/02, others will finish in 2002/03 as 18-year-olds, while others will finish the year after as 19-year-olds.
	The percentages in both these tables are produced using post-census population estimates. However we are currently unable to provide a historical series on a comparable population basis. Further information can be found in the Department's Statistical First Release, "Participation in Education, Training and Employment by 16–18 Year Olds in England: 2001 and 2002" available online at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000426/index.shtml.

Watford Grammar School for Boys

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of students at Watford Grammar School for Boys are selected by aptitude or ability.

David Miliband: This information is not collected centrally by the Department.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Iraq

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the answer of 9 December 2003, Official Report, column 422W, on Iraq, whether the complete review of missing drugs and supplies has finished; what the findings were; whether new drug supply systems are now fully operational; whether supply accounting and reporting systems are in place; what the new national drug formulary comprises; whether shortages of medicine in Iraq are continuing; when he expects full medical supplies will get through to the Iraqi people; and if he will make a statement.

Hilary Benn: The World Health Organisation (WHO) recently presented a report to the Iraqi Ministry of Health (IMOH) assessing the national drug and supply system, which is currently being considered. In parallel, the IMOH have also been provided with essential drug policy and quality guidance and support to the assessment of the national drug regulations and registration systems. Plans for strengthening the IMOH National Drug Regulatory Authority have been agreed and guidelines for good storage practices are being prepared. Additional strategies for upgrading the Drug Information Centre have been finalised and procurement of equipment is under way. A new National Formulary, comprising over 1,000 medicines has been produced and is available from the IMOH.
	New procurement and distribution management teams have been set up by the IMOH, replacing the previous system under the corrupt, state-owned Kimadia Company. Procurement of essential medical supplies has been initiated and a delivery is expected in the next few days. Further shipments, including critical medical supplies for the Governorates, are on order.
	Significant progress has been made to improve national drugs supplies and systems: The WHO report that stocks of 23 drugs for chronic diseases out of the 32 commonly used, are in sufficient supply to meet patient demand. The IMOH, WHO and the CPA continue to work to further improve both drug supplies and systems in Iraq.

Iraq

Colin Burgon: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what aid and assistance his Department is giving to the Iraqi people.

Hilary Benn: DFID has committed over £278 million for humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Iraq since March 2003, of which £70 million has been channelled through the International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq (IRFFI). DFID has also provided a number of staff, filling a range of posts, to the Iraqi ministries and the Coalition Provincial Authority (CPA).
	On 19 February, I published DFID's plans to contribute to the reconstruction of Iraq over the next two years in our interim Country Assistance Plan. It has been placed in the House of Commons Library and can be found on the DFID website: www.dfid.gov.uk

Liberia

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what assistance his Department has (a) pledged and (b) delivered to assist Liberian refugees to (i) return to and (ii) re-integrate into society in Liberia; and if he will make a statement.

Hilary Benn: DFID's relief and reconstruction strategy for Liberia, in 2003 and 2004, has concentrated on helping to relieve the humanitarian crisis, provide security, and restore basic services so that both refugees and internally displaced persons can return to their places of origin. Over this period, DFID has committed a total of £10.6 million for these purposes and has so far disbursed £3.6 million for humanitarian programmes, £0.4 million in support of the UN security coordination agency and interim care centres for children, and £2.7 million for rehabilitation of basic services. For 2004, DFID is discussing with various agencies proposals totalling £1.7 million for humanitarian support, and £2.2 million for reactivation of health care, water supplies, and agricultural livelihoods.
	In addition, DFID has pledged a total of £6 million to support Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration programmes over 2003–05, of which we have so far disbursed £1 million. These funds are intended to assist the re-integration into their communities of ex-combatants and others affected by war.

Staff with Disabilities

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development for what reasons the Service Delivery Agreement target to have 3.3 per cent. of senior Civil Service posts filled with staff with disabilities has not been met.

Mr. Gareth Thomas: DFID is an equal opportunities employer. We value diversity. DFID's policy on recruitment is to stimulate and encourage applications from all sections of the community specifically including   candidates with disabilities. We word our advertisements accordingly. Final selection, however, is on merit, and the composition of the Senior Civil Service group is a reflection of appointments made on this basis, through open competition or internal promotion.
	There are currently 79 members of the Senior Civil Service in DFID, so performance against the target is very sensitive to small changes in the actual number of staff with disabilities in post.
	In general, DFID is aware that there are more disabled people in the Department than declare their impairment and is actively pursuing a number of measures to develop a more open culture on disability. However, it will remain the individual's choice to define themselves as disabled or not.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Child Maintenance

Barry Sheerman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many British citizens avoid paying child maintenance because they have left the country; and how many of these reside in the EU.

Chris Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Barry Sheerman, dated 21 May 2004
	In replying to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many British citizens avoid paying child maintenance because they have left the country; and how many of these reside in the EU.
	I do not have the information you seek. I can however say at 30 November 2003 there were around 300 cases where further action was suspended because the non-resident parent was living abroad. I am unable to determine how many of those cases reside in the EU.

Child Support

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when the new Child Support Agency formula will be applied to all absent parents, irrespective of the date of claim; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Pond: I refer the hon. Member to the written answer I gave him on 18 December 2003, Official Report, column 1092W.

Child Support

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his Written Statement of 21 April, Official Report, columns 19–21WS on child support, for what reasons some new cases were unable to be progressed on the new system.

Chris Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 21 May 2004
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Written Statement of 21st April, Official Report, columns 19–21WS on child support, for what reasons some new cases were unable to be progressed on the new system.
	Some cases were unable to be progressed on the new system because of problems within the computer service provided to the Child Support Agency by EDS. The Agency is working closely with EDS to remedy those problems and as it does so it will become possible to progress those cases.

Child Support

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his Written Statement of 21 April 2004, Official Report, columns 19–21WS on the child support scheme, when he estimates that reliable figures on (a) compliance and (b) throughput will be available.

Chris Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 21 May 2004
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary questions about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Written Statement of 21st April, Official Report, columns 19–21WS on the child support scheme, when he estimates that reliable figures on (a) compliance and (b) throughput will be available.
	Whilst EDS have made significant progress in relation to correcting defects within their computer service we are still working through with them how these can be applied retrospectively to provide the type of information you seek. We do not yet have detailed plans for this work and I am therefore unable to provide the estimate requested.

Child Support

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his written statement of 21 April 2004, Official Report, columns 19–21WS, for what reasons his Department has increased the amount retained from the monthly payments to EDS from 15 per cent. to 15 to 20 per cent.

Chris Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 21 May 2004
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary questions about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Written Statement of 21st April, Official Report, columns 19–21WS, for what reasons his Department has increased the amount retained from the monthly payments to EDS from 15 per cent, to 15 to 20 per cent.
	In the last quarter the Department has retained between 15% and 20% of the monies that would otherwise be due to EDS. The amount of the retention actually made each month reflects the service levels achieved by EDS in the provision of their contracted service to the Agency.

Child Support Agency

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his Oral Statement of 11 February 2004 to the Work and Pensions Select Committee on the Child Support Agency reforms, when the IT recovery programme (a) began and (b) will be completed; and if he will make a statement.

Chris Pond: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the Chief Executive, Mr. Doug Smith. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Doug Smith to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 21 May 2004
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary questions about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Oral Statement of 11th February, to the Work and Pensions Select Committee on the Child Support Agency reforms, when the IT recovery programme (a) began and (b) will be completed; and if he will make a statement.
	Since November 2003 we have been involved with EDS to agree the scope, design and development schedule for their programme to remedy issues associated with their provision of a computer service to support the Child Support Reform programme. This has led to enhancements to the main system in January and March and to the work management and telephony system (again in January and March). They have currently planned a further major software release in June. We are still discussing the final content and delivery timetable of subsequent enhancements.

CABINET OFFICE

Obesity Initiative

Jeff Ennis: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office for what reason the Government discounts to private health club membership for firemen, nurses, police and ambulance workers as part of its initiative to cut obesity have not been extended to all categories of Civil Servants.

Douglas Alexander: The Government are committed to looking after the occupational health of Civil Servants. Having pro-active occupational health policies not only benefits employees but can also assist the organisation by helping to reduce levels of sickness absence.
	As part of programmes to raise awareness of health issues, Government Departments and agencies are free to negotiate membership discounts on behalf of their staff with private health club providers, or provide their own fitness facilities.

DEFENCE

Aircraft Carrier Programme

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the progress of the new aircraft carrier programme.

Adam Ingram: The Future Carrier (CVF) programme remains in the Assessment Phase. Ministers are currently considering proposals on the overall CVF programme, the alliance strategy and on when to proceed to the Demonstration and Manufacture phases. We expect to make an announcement when these deliberations are complete.

Aircraft Carrier Programme

Nick Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to make an announcement concerning the Future Carrier Programme, the Alliance Strategy and the timetable for the demonstration and   manufacture phases; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Ministers are currently considering proposals on the overall CVF programme, the alliance strategy and on when to proceed to the Demonstration and Manufacture phases. We expect to make an announcement when these deliberations are complete.

AWE Aldermaston

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department's policy in respect of the proposal to build a high-powered laser facility at AWE Aldermaston has changed since 5 July 1999.

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence is currently considering a new proposal for a laser facility at AWE to replace the existing HELEN laser. In 2001, because of time and cost overruns on the United States National Ignition Facility, it was decided not to continue with plans, announced on 5 July 1999, Official Report, column 341W, to build a United Kingdom target chamber attached to that facility.

Eurofighter

Lindsay Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will promote the benefit of Eurofighter to the Singapore Government.

Adam Ingram: This Government are actively involved in promoting Eurofighter Typhoon to the Government of Singapore through the work of the Defence Export Services Organisation. The aircraft has been included on the shortlist to be evaluated for the Singaporean next Fighter Replacement Programme, and a decision is expected early in 2005.

International Committee of the Red Cross

Glenda Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether, when the administration of Camp Bucca was handed back to the British Armed Forces, they began to investigate the allegations of ill-treatment detailed to the International Committee of the Red Cross by detainees.

Geoff Hoon: No. The United Kingdom took over the running of Camp Bucca from the United States on 25 September 2003, and continued to run the facility until the opening of the Divisional Temporary Detention Facility at Shaibah on 15 December 2003.
	The two incidents concerning prisoners at Camp Bucca, detailed in the ICRC's report on the Treatment by the Coalition Forces of Prisoners of War and other Protected Persons by the Geneva Conventions in Iraq during Arrest, internment and Interrogations, both allegedly occurred while the facility was run by the US. These are matters for the US.

International Committee of the Red Cross

Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the death mentioned at paragraph 44 of the International Committee of the Red Cross Report on the Treatment by the Coalition Forces of Prisoners of War and other protected persons in Iraq said to have occurred on 22 September 2003 was the result of actions by British armed forces.

Geoff Hoon: holding answer 13 May 2004
	The United Kingdom took over the running of Camp Bucca from the United States on 25 September 2003. The incident referred to in Paragraph 45 of the ICRC Report on the Treatment by the Coalition Forces of Prisoners of War   and other Protected Persons by the Geneva Conventions in Iraq during Arrest, Internment and Interrogations, occurred before the UK took over the facility, therefore was not the result of action by British Armed Forces.

Investigation Techniques

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assistance has been provided by the British Special Air Services to the United States military forces in investigation techniques of military personnel since 1984.

Adam Ingram: I am withholding details under Exemption 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

IT Outsourcing

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  what the schedule is for the plan to outsource IT support and provision across his Department;
	(2)  what the projected budget is for the (a) outsourced support and provision of IT services for his Department and (b) cost of terminating existing contracts;
	(3)  what weighting will be given to the previous track records in other areas of the civil and public sector of the consortia that are bidding for the support and provision of IT services in his Department;
	(4)  what his contingency plan is for the possibility that an outside contractor wins the contract for the support and provision of IT in his Department and then fails during the term of that contract.

Adam Ingram: These questions have been answered with respect to the Defence Information Infrastructure (DII) programme. The Ministry of Defence is in negotiations with two potential commercial Delivery Partners (DP) for the provision of Information Systems services. The DII programme is currently in the Assessment Phase of the Smart Procurement cycle.
	In terms of cost, the MOD currently spends over   £450 million per annum on its information infrastructure. It is anticipated that the DII Public/Private Partnership contract will cost in the region of £4 billion over 10 years.
	Track record is one of a number of factors included in the evaluation of bids. The Department's Supplier Relations Group has conducted research of bidding consortium members' performance both in Defence and across Government. In addition, the project has taken up references, by telephone and through visits, from existing customers of the key companies in the bidding consortia. Further reference visits will be conducted during the final phase of the procurement, targeting customers in receipt of a similar volume and range of services.
	10 major legacy contracts for IT infrastructure have been identified and these will be subsumed within, or superseded by, the DII contract. The majority of these contracts are due to expire naturally over the next 18 months. An options appraisal has been conducted for each contract and an appropriate scenario agreed for each during subsequent mitigation planning. Where the risks, liabilities or known termination charges are unacceptably high, the preferred option is to allow a contract to run to expiry and then assimilate the activity within DII. Any contracts that currently lie beyond the next three years, which in the main are PFI contracts, will be subsumed on expiry. Residual liabilities will be assessed more fully following negotiations with bidders in the later stages of procurement but generally we would expect to be in no worse a position than now and   would seek to be in a better position through negotiation.
	Support to deployed operations will continue to be supplied by Service personnel. For all other elements of IT infrastructure provision and support the MOD will mitigate the risk of supplier failure by contracting with a consortium which will provide the services through a range of service providers. This will ensure that in the event that one member of the consortium fails, there is capacity available for another consortium member to pick up the service provision. In addition, the MOD will retain rights to step in and use its own staff or other third party contractors to remedy major service failures. Ultimately, the MOD will have rights to terminate the contract for material breaches in performance, with options to take services back in-house or contract with another commercial provider for their delivery.

King's Regiment

Kevin McNamara: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the postings were of the 1st Battalion, The King's Regiment for the last two years; and what postings are planned in the next year.

Adam Ingram: 1st Battalion, The King's Regiment has been based at Catterick since March 2001. The Regiment deployed to Iraq from June to October 2003. One Company has since deployed to Kosovo, where they remain. During the period the unit has exercised in Canada (in the summer of 2002) and was involved in Operation Fresco (towards the end of 2002 and the start of 2003).
	It is currently planned that a Company from the unit will deploy to the Falkland Islands later this year. The remainder of the unit is scheduled to undertake a number of routine tasks in support of the training of other units.

Missiles

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what armaments are to be fitted to the Future Surface Combatant.

Adam Ingram: The Future Surface Combatant is currently in its concept stage. As such, no decisions have yet been taken on specific armaments. However, it is envisaged that its roles will include Anti-Surface Warfare, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Anti-Air Warfare and Land Attack, and the ships will be equipped accordingly.

Overseas Bribery

Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many allegations of overseas bribery involving UK companies his Department has received from the US Administration since February 1999; on what dates these allegations were received; and what action his Department took on each allegation.

Adam Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Europe on 3 February 2004, Official Report, column 844W.

Procurement

Paul Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a copy of the long-term costings for the equipment programme.

Adam Ingram: The detailed financial data and planning assumptions about the proposed content and timing of the future equipment programme form part of internal advice to Ministers on the overall affordability of the defence programme and of individual projects at the time they come forward for approval. This information therefore anticipates decisions still to be taken by Ministers. In parts it also contains information which is commercially sensitive. I am therefore withholding such information under Exemptions 2 and 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.
	Information is, however, routinely made available on a range of major equipment projects, which together form the substantial part of the Department's forward equipment programme, for example in support of the PAC's annual Major Projects Report and the HCDC's annual inquiry into defence procurement. This detail is set in broader context by the publication every two years of the Department's overarching Defence Investment Strategy.

Refuelling Tanker Aircraft

Paul Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the Government plan to work jointly with the French Government in the CVF programme; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: We are continuing to explore opportunities with the French for potential Carrier co-operation. We believe there could be potential political, military and economic benefits to be gained through such co-operation, but we must ensure that the United Kingdom's CVF programme is not disrupted.

Type 45 Destroyer

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on progress on the Type 45 destroyer programme.

Adam Ingram: The Type 45 will be the biggest and most capable class of air defence destroyers ever built for the Royal Navy, and will be equipped to carry out a range of tasks. Six ships are on order with the prime contractor BAE Systems, providing stability for the shipbuilding work force on the Clyde, and at the new VT facility at Portsmouth, for the remainder of the decade. The programme is in full production against a mature design, a first for a UK warship project at this stage of its development.

UN Operations

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library transcripts of the media interviews he gave on 10 May 2004 on the situation in Iraq and investigations into alleged abuse of detainees in British custody in Iraq.

Geoff Hoon: The Ministry of Defence does not routinely hold full transcripts of interviews given by Ministers on radio or television programmes.

UN Operations

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many vehicles have been transported to Iraq for use by British armed forces, broken down by type.

Adam Ingram: This information would require extensive manual retrieval and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

UN Operations

Tom Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what length of deployment UK military personnel are required to serve in Iraq.

Adam Ingram: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 19 April 2004, Official Report, column 11W, to the hon. Member for Romford (Mr. Rosindell).

UN Operations

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of each of the (a) Blu-97B, (b) 20 mm Phalanx Sea-to-Air, (c) 25 mm M791, (d) 30 mm PGU-14/B, (e) 120 mm MV Charm, (f) Tow 2 A/B A/tank, (g) AGM-65 G Maverick, (h) Hellfire II/Brimstone, (i) AGM-84 SLAM-ER, (j) AGM-154C JSOW, (k) AGM-158 JASSM, (l) BGM-109 Tactical Tomahawk, (m) Storm Shadow/Scalper, (n) GBU-15, (o) GBU-24, (p) GBU-27, (q) GBU-28B/B, (r) GBU-31JDAM, (s) GBU-37 B/B, (t) GBU-118/B and (u) SSB weapon types were used in Iraq; and which were used against targets in urban areas.

Adam Ingram: The numbers of each weapon type used by British forces during Op. Telic are as follows:
	
		
			 Weapon type Total used 
		
		
			 20 mm Phalanx 0 
			 120 mm CHARM 850 
			 TOW (I and FI variants) 83 
			 AGM-65 G Maverick 38 
			 Storm Shadow 27 
			 GBU-27 9 
		
	
	In respect to the numbers of (l) BGM-109 Tactical Tomahawk, and; in relation to the breakdown of numbers used against urban targets, I am withholding this information in accordance with Exemption la of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information which relates to defence, security and international relations.
	With the exception of the Tactical Tomahawk, those weapon types included in the question but not listed in the table above are not in UK service.

Vaccination

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  when the practice of informed consent for   the administering of vaccines became standard practice;
	(2)  pursuant to the letter from the Under-Secretary of State of 1 December 2003, under what guidelines vaccines were administered that did not have a product licence at that time.

Ivor Caplin: We are currently assembling the information but it is taking time. I will therefore write to the hon. Member and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

HEALTH

Chronic Disease

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what expenditure has been allocated by his Department to projects to improve chronic disease management over the next three years.

John Hutton: The management of chronic conditions and the provision of treatment and support to people with such conditions consume substantial national health service resources within primary care trusts' existing allocations. Our recently announced initiative, improving chronic disease management, is intended to make better use of those resources and offer better care to people with chronic conditions. The Department of Health has, however, allocated a total of £5 million in funding to nine primary care trusts participating in the Evercare pilot scheme to test potential ways in which these improvements might be achieved.

Clinical Advisers (IT Forum)

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the reasons are for the disbandment of the NHS IT forum for clinicians; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: The national health service's national programme for information technology is currently considering options to strengthen the arrangements for   providing advice from clinicians and patients' representatives to inform its work. Members of the National Clinical Advisory Board are fully involved in discussions about its future role. The National Clinical Advisory Board has not been disbanded.

Dental Treatment

Tom Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many dentists working within the London borough of Wandsworth provide national health service dental treatment within their practice; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: Data for number of dentists are not collected by London borough area. The number of national health service dentists in Wandsworth Primary Care Trust (PCT) at 30 September 2003 is shown in the table. 
	
		National health service: Number of dentists in Wandsworth PCT area—30September 2003
		
			 Primary care trust Wandsworth PCT 
		
		
			 General dental service (GDS) 121 
			 Community dental service (CDS) 27 
			 Salaried 4 
			 Total 152 
		
	
	Dentists can work in more than one PCT area. GDS dentists numbers are for those whose main dental work is in the Wandworth PCT area. Therefore, dentists who do some work in this area but more in another PCT have not been included.
	Dentists in the GDS include principals, assistants and vocational dental practitioners. These figures are on a headcount basis rather than whole-time equivalent basis and therefore take no account of part-time working.

Dentists

David Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of adults in (a) Bolton, (b) Greater Manchester and (c) England were registered with an NHS dentist in each of the last seven years.

Rosie Winterton: The information available is for general dental service (GDS) dentist registration rates for adults in the Wigan and Bolton Health Authority at 30 September 1997 to 2001, and for Bolton Primary Care Trust (PCT), which is part of the Greater Manchester Strategic Health Authority (SHA) for 30 September 2002 and 30 September 2003. Figures for the Greater Manchester SHA area are also shown.
	Registrations cover patients who have been to a general dental service dentist within the past 15 months. These will exclude patients who choose to attend occasionally who have not been to a dentist during that period. Registrations are included in the area of the dentist. Patients may choose to have their dental services in a different PCT area from the one in which they live.   The registration period was changed for new registrations and registrations extending from September 1996. Previously the period for adults was 24 months while children's registration lapsed at the end of the following calendar year. This caused registration numbers to fall between November 1997 and August 1998.
	National health service dental services are also provided by the community dental service, personal dental service, the salaried service of the GDS and hospital dental service. These services do not require the patient to be registered with a dentist before treatment.
	
		Adult dental registrations as a percentage of the population at 30September for each year
		
			  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
		
		
			 Wigan and Bolton HA (9)59.6 54.0 52.0 51.4 51.0 n/a n/a 
			 Bolton PCT n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 45.6 45.7 
			 Greater Manchester SHA area (9)60.3 53.9 52.2 52.3 51.9 50.6 49.7 
			 England 51.0 43.8 43.3 43.4 43.4 44.2 44.0 
		
	
	n/a = not available.
	(9) Registration figures are not on the same basis as those for later years because of the change in registration period.
	Patients wishing to register with a NHS dentist can obtain details of dentists accepting new patients in their area by accessing www.nhs.uk, contacting NHS Direct or contacting their local PCT. Currently 93 per cent. of callers to NHS Direct are being directed to sources of NHS dental treatment within locally agreed distance standards.

Dentists

David Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many dentists in (a) Bolton, (b) Greater Manchester and (c) England treated NHS patients in the past seven years; and how many treated only private patients in each year.

Rosie Winterton: The table shows the number of dentists in the general, personal, community, and hospital dental services.
	The figures given are for 30 September for each year. Before 2002 Bolton was part of the Wigan and Bolton Health Authority. In 2002 health authorities (HAs) were replaced by primary care trusts (PCTs).
	Figures for the number of dentists who treat private patients only are not available. Few dentists are purely private. The Office of Fair Trading report "The private dentistry market" in the UK stated that only 210 practices are totally private in the United Kingdom out of 11,000 practices in total.
	Figures are also given for England.
	
		Number of dentists at 30September of each year
		
			  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
		
		
			 Wigan and Bolton HA 205 210 211 219 207 n/a n/a 
			 Bolton PCT n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 85 84 
			 Greater Manchester Strategic Health Authority area 1,115 1,127 1,162 1,155 1,150 1,161 1,203 
			 England 20,483 21,041 21,556 21,902 22,438 23,051 23,490 
		
	
	n/a = not available

Dialysis

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the (a) average and (b) maximum waiting time for vascular access surgery for dialysis patients for (i) England, (ii) each region and (iii) each strategic health authority in each year since 1996.

John Hutton: Information on waiting times for vascular access surgery is not centrally available. Waiting times for consultant led in-patient elective admissions and consultant led first out-patient appointments following general practitioner referral are collected on the consultant's main specialty not by procedure.

Diets

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what evaluation he has made of studies into long-term calorific restriction diets and their effectiveness in reducing the risk of (a) cancer, (b) coronary heart disease, (c) diabetes and (d) strokes.

Melanie Johnson: The Department has not specifically evaluated the long-term effects of calorie restricted diets, but animal research has consistently shown that calorie restriction can increase lifespan by about 30 per cent. and protect against cancer. The long-term effect of calorie restriction in humans has yet to be established.
	Obesity increases the risk of developing coronary heart disease, diabetes, some cancers and hypertension. Evidence indicates that maintaining a healthy weight is a key element in the prevention of these conditions.

Food Standards Agency

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) Parliamentary Questions, (b) adjournment debates and (c) urgent Questions on the work of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) the Department has answered since it was established; and if he will make a statement on the accountability of the FSA to Parliament.

Melanie Johnson: holding answer 11 May 2004
	Ministers have answered 1,281 Parliamentary Questions, two adjournment debates and no urgent questions on the work of the Food Standards Agency (FSA) since it was established. There has been one Opposition Day debate, eight European Scrutiny Debates in European Standing Committee C, one debate on a prayer against a Statutory Instrument in the House of Commons and one in the House of Lords, seven Select Committees where both oral and written evidence was provided and six Select Committees where written memoranda only were provided. FSA policy areas have not been debated in Westminster Hall. Health Ministers have not taken Primary Legislation through Parliament on behalf of FSA.
	The FSA is a United Kingdom non-Ministerial department established by the Food Standards Act 1999. It is accountable to the Westminster Parliament through the Secretary of State for Health and to the administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland through the relevant Health Ministers. Under the 1999 Act, the FSA's expenditure is paid out of money provided by Parliament and the administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Its Annual Report and Accounts is laid before the Westminster Parliament, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Assembly. Its Chief Executive is the FSA Principal Accounting Officer.
	Correspondence to Health Ministers from hon. and right hon. Members about issues for which the FSA is responsible normally receives a reply from the relevant Minister. The Chairman and Chief Executive of FSA reply to correspondence addressed directly to them.
	The Meat Hygiene Service (MHS) is an executive agency of the FSA. It is responsible for enforcement of meat hygiene and BSE-related legislation in licensed meat plants in Great Britain. It also carries out certain functions on behalf of the Environment and Rural Affairs Departments.

Health Service

Joe Benton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what percentage of women in Bootle with suspected breast cancer saw a specialist within two weeks in each of the last five years.

Melanie Johnson: The information requested is not collected on a constituency basis. The information in the table relates to national health service organisations serving the Bootle constituency.
	
		Waiting times for patients referred urgently by their GP with suspected breast cancer to 1st outpatient appointment: NHS Trusts in Crosby
		
			  Quarter   NHS Trust Percentage of patients seen in two weeks Total patients seen Patients seen in two weeks 
		
		
			 1999–2000 1 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 76.2 101 77 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 80.4 97 78 
			   
			 1999–2000 2 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 88.2 102 90 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 166 166 
			   
			 1999–2000 3 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 95.0 120 114 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.5 210 209 
			   
			 1999–2000 4 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 118 118 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.5 209 208 
			   
			 2000–01 1 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 98.0 102 100 
			   Royal Liverpool Children's NHS Trust 92.6 190 176 
			   
			 2000–01 2 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 155 155 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 295 295 
			   
			 2000–01 3 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 155 155 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 270 270 
			   
			 2000–01 4 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 143 143 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 96.8 250 242 
			   
			 2001–02 1 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 99.4 157 156 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 98.2 276 271 
			   
			 2001–02 2 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 175 175 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 92.2 258 238 
			   
			 2001–02 3 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 225 225 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 84.7 320 271 
			   
			 2001–02 4 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 198 198 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 98.4 319 314 
			   
			   
			 2002–03 1 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 234 234 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.0 307 304 
			   
			 2002–03 2 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 99.1 223 221 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.6 272 271 
			   
			 2002–03 3 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 99.6 255 254 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 96.7 391 378 
			   
			 2002–03 4 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 229 229 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 98.9 285 282 
			   
			 2003–04 1 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 221 221 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.4 320 318 
			 2003–04 2 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 265 265 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 99.7 373 372 
			   
			 2003–04 3 Aintree Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 271 271 
			   Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust 100.0 374 374 
		
	
	Source:
	DH form QMCW.

Health Service

David Borrow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the levels of elective admission to the NHS in South Ribble in the past five years.

Melanie Johnson: The information requested is shown in the table.
	
		Count of in-year elective (waiting time, booked, planned) admissions—PCT of responsibility5F5 Chorley and South Ribble Primary Care Trust—NHS Hospitals, England 1998–99 to 2002–03. Excluding regular attenders.
		
			 PCT of responsibility 5F2 Chorley and South Ribble 
		
		
			 1998–99 30,440 
			 1999–2000 32,827 
			 2000–01 34,386 
			 2001–02 24,687 
			 2002–03 32,671 
		
	
	Notes:
	1.   An in-year admission is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one health care provider, excluding admissions beginning before 1 April at the start of the data year. Periods of care on-going at the end of the data year (unfinished admission episodes) are included. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.
	2.   Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (i.e. the data are ungrossed).
	3.   PCT and strategic health authority (SHA) data was added to historic data-years in the HES database using 2002–03 boundaries, as a one-off exercise in 2004. The quality of the data on PCT of Treatment and SHA of Treatment is poor in 1996–97, 1997–98 and 1998–99, with over a third of all finished episodes having missing values in these years. Data quality of PCT of general practitioner practice and SHA of GP practice in 1997–98 and 1998–99 is also poor, with a high proportion missing values where practices changed or ceased to exist. There is less change in completeness of the residence-based fields over time, where the majority of unknown values are due to missing postcodes on birth episodes. Users of time series analysis including these years need to be aware of these issues in their interpretation of the data.
	Source:
	Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health.

Health Service

Tony Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many rapid access chest pain clinics there are in Workington constituency.

Melanie Johnson: There are no rapid access chest pain clinics based in Workington. However, there is a clinic in Whitehaven.

Health Tourism

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Health   what assessment his Department has made of the scale of health tourism; and if he will make a statement.

John Hutton: The national health service has never been required to provide statistics on the number of overseas visitors treated under the provisions of the National Health Service (Charges to Overseas Visitors) Regulations 1989. It is therefore not possible to give a definitive assessment of the scale of this matter. Nevertheless, NHS staff operating the charging regime have told us that there are significant issues in some areas, which we are taking action to deal with. We are taking forward a study of 12 NHS trusts across England, the results of which will, over time, help to give us a better understanding of the level of inappropriate use of the NHS by overseas visitors.
	In addition, on 14 May I launched a public consultation on proposals to exclude overseas visitors from eligibility for free NHS primary medical services. We are also commissioning a study of the use of these services by overseas visitors which will inform our consideration of the responses to the consultation.

Heart Bypass Operations

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many heart bypass operations there were per million population in (a) England and (b) each strategic health authority in each year since 1997.

Melanie Johnson: The information requested is shown in the table.
	Heart bypass operations have increased in number over the past six years. However, angioplasty is increasingly being used to treat patients who would have undergone bypass surgery in the past and the procedures performed in national health service hospitals in England have increased from 17,291 in 1997–98 to 34,986 in 2002–03.
	
		All operations (ICD-10 K40-K46) Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts (CABGs). Count of Finished Consultant Episodes by Strategic Health Authority (SHA) of Residence. NHS Hospitals, England 1997–98 to 2002–03
		
			 SHA of Residence 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 2002–03 
		
		
			 Q01 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire HA 976 1,148 1,111 1,015 1,040 1,134 
			 Q02 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire HA 928 728 624 721 849 728 
			 Q03 Essex HA 475 600 552 752 580 638 
			 Q04 North West London HA 940 921 852 929 824 852 
			 Q05 North Central London HA 397 415 410 357 417 405 
			 Q06 North East London HA 496 575 528 698 616 591 
			 Q07 South East London HA 586 620 506 460 500 517 
			 Q08 South West London HA 447 446 476 501 593 566 
			 Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear HA 844 867 825 837 912 772 
			 Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley HA 842 875 732 751 650 772 
			 Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire HA 417 874 868 878 844 1,070 
			 Q12 West Yorkshire HA 975 1,108 916 977 1,097 998 
			 Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire HA 1,137 1,158 1,045 1,179 1,232 1,437 
			 Q14 Greater Manchester HA 1,050 1,160 1,185 1,301 1,395 1,515 
			 Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside HA 996 1,018 1,084 1,104 1,137 1,421 
			 Q16 Thames Valley HA 641 801 819 793 916 931 
			 Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight HA 623 752 749 947 852 769 
			 Q18 Kent and Medway HA 702 738 702 674 739 707 
			 Q19 Surrey and Sussex HA 1,057 974 1,211 1,194 1,191 1,141 
			 Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire HA 829 1,012 1,117 1,048 1,073 940 
			 Q21 South West Peninsula HA 660 795 941 987 1,061 918 
			 Q22 Dorset and Somerset HA 586 656 592 568 502 494 
			 Q23 South Yorkshire HA 518 523 630 632 639 769 
			 Q24 Trent HA 652 1,044 1,039 1,088 1,025 1,124 
			 Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland HA 626 690 625 560 615 588 
			 Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire HA 585 633 645 801 736 825 
			 Q27 Birmingham and The Black Country HA 1,153 1,095 1,030 1,132 983 1,226 
			 Q28 Coventry, Warwickshire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire HA 669 717 682 716 643 686 
			 U England Not Otherwise Specified — 2 — 4 2 6 
			  England 20,807 22,945 22,496 23,604 23,663 24,540 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. A finished admission episode is the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. Please note that admissions do not represent the number of in-patients, as a person may have more than one admission within the year.
	2. Figures have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data (ie the data are ungrossed).
	3. All operations count of episodes—these figures represent a count of all FCE's where the procedure was mentioned in any of the 12 (four prior to 2002–03) operation fields in a HES record. A record is only included once in each count, even if an operation is mentioned in more than one operation field of the record. Population figures are not available so only operation counts can be provided.
	4. Strategic Health Authority (SHA) Data Quality—SHA data were added to historic data-years in the HES database using 2002–03 boundaries, as a one-off exercise in 2004. The quality of the data on SHA of treatment is poor in 1998–99, with over a third of all finished episodes having missing values in these years. Users of time series analysis including 1998–99 need to be aware of these issues in their interpretation of the data.
	Source:
	Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health.

Hepatitis C

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to finalise compensation arrangements for those who contracted hepatitis C from blood transfusions.

Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a further statement on the payment of compensation to patients who were infected with hepatitis C as a result of NHS treatment.

Melanie Johnson: Work is progressing to finalise the arrangements, to begin making ex-gratia payments. The company that will disburse payments, the Skipton Fund, was incorporated on 25 March. The four United Kingdom health departments expect the Skipton Fund to be operational shortly.

Medical Negligence

John Randall: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what code of practice is in place to prevent conflicts of interest concerning solicitors whose practices undertake medical negligence cases who are a (a) board member and (b) chairman of a health trust.

John Hutton: The codes of conduct and code accountability for national health service boards require that all board members should declare any conflict of interest that arises in the course of conducting NHS business. The codes also requires that board members should declare any business interests in the field of health and social care which should be formally recorded in the minutes of the board and entered into a register which is available to the public. When a conflict of interest is established, the board member involved is also required to withdraw from any related board discussion and not play any part in the relevant discussion or decision. All NHS board members are required on appointment to sign an undertaking that they will comply with the provisions of the codes. A copy of the codes is available in the Library.

NHS Information Technology

Archie Norman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many (a) clinical and (b) non-clinical NHS staff had access to e-mail and web browsing by (i) March 2003 and (ii) March 2004.

John Hutton: Numbers of national health service staff with email and web browsing access are shown in the table.
	
		
			  March 2003 March 2004 
		
		
			 Clinical staff 715,888 874,813 
			 Total NHS staff 1,022,488 1,048,485

NHS Staff (Wirral, South)

Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the levels of elective admissions to the NHS in Wirral South in the past five years.

Melanie Johnson: I refer my hon. Friend to the response I gave on 10 May 2004, Official Report, columns 162–63W.

Nurse Training

Paul Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many whole-time equivalent (a) health visitors, (b) school nurses, (c) district nurses and (d) community psychiatric nurses were in training in each region in September of each year since 1997, broken down by (i) gender and (ii) ethnic origin.

John Hutton: Information on the number of whole-time equivalent health visitors, school nurses, district nurses and community psychiatric nurses in training in each national health service region as constituted until 31 March 1998 is shown in Table 1, for each national health service region as constituted between 1 April 1998 and 31 March 2001 is shown in Table 2, and for each Government office region between 1 April 2001 and 31 March 2002 is shown in Table 3.
	Information on the gender and ethnic origin of health visitors, school nurses, district nurses and community psychiatric nurses, in training is not available.
	
		Table 1: Student populations by regional office area, 1997–98 -- Whole-time equivalents
		
			  School nurses District nurses Health visitors Community psychiatric nurses 
		
		
			 England 128 603 623 333 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 35 120 115 51 
			 Trent — 42 52 — 
			 Anglia and Oxford 8 75 73 71 
			 North Thames 16 76 84 65 
			 South Thames 34 119 117 73 
			 South and West — 57 61 — 
			 West Midlands 35 62 53 43 
			 North West — 53 69 31 
		
	
	Source:
	Finance and Workforce Information Returns.
	
		Table 2: Student populations by regional office area -- Whole-time equivalents
		
			  School nurses District nurses Health visitors Community psychiatric nurses 
		
		
			 1998–99 
			 England 119 542 580 250 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 31 103 129 13 
			 Trent 7 50 55 3 
			 West Midlands 19 62 52 40 
			 North West 14 64 76 37 
			 Eastern 5 38 38 26 
			 London 24 93 101 55 
			 South East 19 96 89 64 
			 South West 1 36 42 13 
			  
			 1999–2000 
			 England 137 572 598 252 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 27 127 142 38 
			 Trent 9 43 53 3 
			 West Midlands 18 67 52 34 
			 North West 23 71 84 30 
			 Eastern 10 46 53 38 
			 London 24 101 99 43 
			 South East 20 89 81 51 
			 South West 7 28 34 16 
			  
			 2000–01 
			 England 162 560 710 207 
			 Northern and Yorkshire 18 80 190 6 
			 Trent 14 49 59 — 
			 West Midlands 20 67 60 34 
			 North West 23 71 84 30 
			 Eastern 18 53 68 29 
			 London 28 103 105 67 
			 South East 21 96 101 34 
			 South West 20 42 44 7 
		
	
	Source:
	Finance and Workforce Information Returns.
	
		Table 3: Student populations by Government regional office area, 2001–02 -- Whole-time equivalents
		
			  School nurses District nurses Health visitors Community psychiatric nurses 
		
		
			 England 147 520 622 160 
			 North East 10 61 69 6 
			 North West 31 84 96 21 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 25 102 99 — 
			 East Midlands 6 — 61 — 
			 West Midlands 24 68 64 41 
			 East of England 4 14 18 12 
			 London 28 100 113 57 
			 South East 20 92 104 24 
			 South West — — — — 
		
	
	Source:
	Finance and Workforce Information Returns.

Statins (Warrington, North)

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in Warrington North are being treated with statins.

Melanie Johnson: The information requested is not collected on a constituency basis and neither is the number of people currently being prescribed statins. However, the number of statins prescribed for Warrington Primary Care Trust is shown in the table.
	
		Total number of statins prescribed by general practitioner practices in the community, in England, for the year beginning January 2003.
		
			  Region/type of region Prescription items Prescription items per 1,000 population 
		
		
			 Warrington (PCT) 99,462 522 
			 Cheshire and Merseyside   (SHA) 1,363,439 582 
			 England Total(10) 21,606,624 441 
		
	
	(10) The England total includes a small number of prescription items, prescribed by GPs, that the PPA have been unable to allocate to a PCT or SHA.
	Notes:
	1. The information, by PCT and strategic health authority (SHA), was obtained from the Prescribing Analysis and Cost (PACT) system, which covers prescriptions prescribed by general practitioner practices and dispensed in the community. Prescriptions written within a GP practice but dispensed outside the PCT or SHA will be included in the PCT or SHA in which, respectively, the GP practice is based. Prescriptions written in England but dispensed outside England are included. Prescriptions written in Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man but dispensed in England are excluded.
	2. Prescriptions are written on a prescription form. Each single item written on the form is counted as a prescription item.
	3. The figures for Statins represent data on the following chemical entities: atorvastatin; cerivastatin; fluvastatin sodium; lovastatin; pravastatin sodium; rosuvastatin calcium; simvastatin.

Waiting Lists/Times

Peter Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what changes there have been to NHS waiting list times in the last seven years for the residents of Burnley.

Melanie Johnson: Information on national health service waiting list times is not gathered on a constituency basis. The tables show information based on NHS organisations serving the Burnley area.
	
		In-patient waiting list by provider for the Burnley area (1996–2004)
		
			   Months waiting to be seen 
			  Unit name Total 0–2 3–5 6–8 9–11 12–14 15–17 
		
		
			 1997–98 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 6,157 3,061 1,470 968 625 33 0 
			 1997–98 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 6,569 3,224 1,844 1,087 412 2 0 
			 1998–99 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 4,895 2,908 1,092 546 288 61 0 
			 1998–99 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 5,357 3,231 1,103 691 318 14 0 
			 1999–2000 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 4,803 2,458 1,190 639 377 120 19 
			 1999–2000 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 5,084 2,977 1,202 606 251 48 0 
			 2000–01 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 4,554 2,335 1,207 686 326 0 0 
			 2000–01 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 5,032 2,924 1,283 593 232 0 0 
			 2001–02 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 4,749 2,266 1,165 778 405 135 0 
			 2001–02 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 4,883 2,532 1,303 692 356 0 0 
			 2002–03 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 4,595 2,219 1,223 761 392 0 0 
			 2002–03 Blackburn Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 3,968 2,375 1,078 432 83 0 0 
			 2003–04 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 8,100 5,045 2,200 855 0 0 0 
		
	
	
		Out-patient waiting list by Provider for the Burnley area (1996–2004) -- Weeks waiting to be seen from a GP referral to consultant appointment
		
			  Unit name Not seen 13 to 25 Not seen 26 plus 
		
		
			 1997–98 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 1,266 69 
			 1997–98 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 66 0 
			 1998–99 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 2,371 895 
			 1998–99 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 815 258 
			 1999–2000 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 2,158 1,455 
			 1999–2000 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 516 147 
			 2000–01 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 1,548 521 
			 2000–01 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Health Care NHS Trust 283 24 
			 2001–02 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 1,094 0 
			 2001–02 Blackburn, Hyndburn and Ribble Valley Healthcare NHS Trust 246 0 
		
	
	
		Weeks waiting to be seen from a GP referral to consultant appointment
		
			  Unit name Not seen 13–17 Not seen 17–21 Not seen 21–26 Not seen 26 plus 
		
		
			 2002–03 Burnley Healthcare NHS Trust 603 273 0 0 
			 2002–03 Blackburn Hyndburn and Ribble   Valley Health Care NHS Trust 164 55 0 0 
			 2003–04 East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust 291 0 0 0 
		
	
	Source:
	Department of Health QM08

Waiting Lists/Times

Tom Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what medical treatment there is the longest waiting time for (a) consultation and (b) treatment at NHS hospitals within the Greater London area.

John Hutton: The treatment area with the longest wait to receive a first out-patient appointment with a consultant within the five London strategic health authorities (SHAs) is clinical immunology and allergy.
	Of a selection of common, elective, surgical operations, the one with the longest average wait to receive admitted treatment within the five London SHAs is knee replacement.

PRIME MINISTER

Iraq

Glenda Jackson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will estimate how many Iraqi (a) women, (b) children and (c) civilians have been (i) killed and (ii) injured in the recent siege of Fallujah.

Tony Blair: The Coalition always take great care to minimise the risks to civilians in all areas of Iraq. It is not always possible to confirm whether casualties have occurred, as Coalition forces are not always able to enter the areas from which they are being fired on. There are further difficulties in estimating numbers of deaths when those deaths have been caused by terrorist attacks.

Iraq

Glenda Jackson: To ask the Prime Minister 
	(1)  pursuant to his answer of 12 May 2004, Official Report, column 385W, on Iraq, whether the three UK military personnel were working in the military intelligence section of Abu Ghraib prison;
	(2)  whether the three UK military personnel who worked in Abu Ghraib prison between January and April were under the command of (a) British and (b) US authorities during that time; and to which authority they reported.

Tony Blair: Yes. The three military personnel were under British Command at all times, reporting to the Senior British Military Representative in Baghdad. They assisted in gathering information important to the Coalition's aim of establishing stability in Iraq through interviewing detainees.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Chapelcross

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to the answer on Chapelcross, of 13 May 2004, Official Report, column 489, whether a breach of the air exclusion zone around Chapelcross took place in 2003; and if she will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: No breach of the air exclusion zone at the Chapelcross nuclear power station took place in 2003.

Mail Services (Northern Ireland)

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate she has made of the number of mail items which were not delivered in Northern Ireland in the last 12 months.

Stephen Timms: Delivery services are the operational concern of Royal Mail Group and I have therefore asked the Chief Executive to reply direct to the hon. Member.

Research Assessment Exercise

John Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will take steps to bridge the funding gap for research projects consequent on implementation of the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise.

Patricia Hewitt: The 2002 Spending Review announced the largest sustained growth in science for a decade, providing an additional £1.25 billion a year by 2005 06, including:
	a dedicated stream of capital for Higher Education Institutions to develop their science research infrastructure;
	substantial new resources to Research Councils to enable them to make a higher contribution to the full costs of the research they sponsor;
	increased funding for the Higher Education Funding Council for England for the research component of HEI block grants, to underpin project funding.
	Alongside this, changes are being implemented, following consultation, to make explicit the responsibility of HEIs for ensuring the long-term sustainability of their research enterprises and to enable them to cost and price research projects more effectively, whether publicly or privately funded. Taken together these measures will, over time, make a substantial impact on the quality and sustainability of the research base.
	The Government will set out its future priorities for   science and innovation in a 10-year Investment Framework for Science and Innovation, to be published in the summer.

Advantage West Midlands

Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the cost was of (a) developing and (b) maintaining (i) the Advantage West Midlands website and (ii) each regional development agency's website in each financial year since 1999.

John Smith: holding answer 13 May 2004
	The information requested is set out in the following table.
	
		
			£ 
		
		
			 East of England Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 Not available Not available Not available 
			 2000–01 Not available Not available Not available 
			 2001–02 Not available Not available 7,000 
			 2002–03 Not available Not available 8,900 
			 2003–04 Not available Not available 5,675 
			 
			 East Midlands Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 26,000 20 46 
			 2000–01 26 20 46 
			 2001–02 26 20 46 
			 2002–03 26 20 46 
			 2003–04 26 20 46 
			 London Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 0 0 0 
			 2000–01 0 0 0 
			 2001–02 0 0 0 
			 2002–03 36,515 18,000 54,515 
			 2003–04 36,515 21,000 57,515 
			 
			 Northwest Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 Not available Not available Not available 
			 2000–01 Not available Not available Not available 
			 2001–02 Not available Not available 5,000 
			 2002–03 Not available Not available 51,214 
			 2003–04 Not available Not available 37,964 
			 
			 ONE North East
			 1999–2000 20,735 0 20,735 
			 2000–01 45,127 11,388 56,515 
			 2001–02 71,204 17,520 88,724 
			 2002–03 12,050 17,520 29,570 
			 2003–04 50,275 17,520 67,795 
			 
			 South East England Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 Not available Not available 7,954 
			 2000–01 Not available Not available 20,160 
			 2001–02 Not available Not available 39,234 
			 2002–03 Not available Not available 48,242 
			 2003–04 10,457 27,213 37,671 
			 
			 
			 South West of England Regional Development Agency 
			 1999–2000 8,400 2,000 104,700 
			 2000–01 14,465 32,735 47,200 
			 2001–02 0 30,000 30,000 
			 2002–03 145,200 15,000 160,200 
			 2003–04 27,000 30,000 57,000 
			 
			 Yorkshire Forward 
			 1999–2000 Not available Not available 0 
			 2000–01 Not available Not available 23,275 
			 2001–02 Not available Not available 14,306 
			 2002–03 Not available Not available 58,000 
			 2003–04 Not available Not available 36,647 
		
	
	Note:
	A breakdown is not available as the services were contracted out.

Advantage West Midlands

Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the salary bill was of (a) Advantage West Midlands and (b) each regional development agency for staff employed in a press office or public relations capacity in each financial year since 1999; and what the average salary was for staff employed in a press office or public relations capacity in each case in each year.

Patricia Hewitt: holding answer 13 May 2004
	The information requested is set out in the following table:
	
		
			 RDA Total salary of relevant RDA staff Average salary of relevant RDA staff 
		
		
			 Advantage West Midlands 1999–2000: N/a N/a 
			  2000–01: N/a N/a 
			  2001–02: 24,136 24,136 
			  2002–03: 80,519 26,839 
			  2003–04: 96,692 32,230 
			
			 East of England 1999–2000: 77,000 31,000 
			 Development Agency 2000–01: 100,000 33,000 
			  2001–02: 99,000 30,000 
			  2002–03: 104,000 32,000 
			  2003–04: 112,000 32,000 
			
			 East Midlands 1999–2000: N/a N/a 
			 Development 2000–01: Outsourced N/a 
			  2001–02: Outsourced N/a 
			  2002–03: 52,000 26,000 
			  2003–04: 52,000 26,000 
			 London Development 1999–2000: Nil Nil 
			 Agency 2000–01: Nil Nil 
			  2000–02: Nil Nil 
			  2002–03: 195,000 39,000 
			  2003–04: 193,000 39,000 
			 Northwest Development 1999–2000: Nil Nil 
			 Agency 2000–01: Nil Nil 
			  2001–02: 71,123 17,780 
			  2002–03: 88,582 17,716 
			  2003–04: 109,078 15,582 
			
			 ONE North East 1999–2000: 106,305 17,717 
			  2000–01: 111,900 18,650 
			  2001–02:117,790 19,361 
			  2002–03: 135,103 22,517 
			  2003–04: 175,242 25,034 
			
			 South East England 1999–2000:75,130 35,956 
			 Development Agency 2000–01: 87,530 37,510 
			  2001–02: 87,122 29,408 
			  2002–03: 151,423 33,694 
			  2003–04: 187,737 30,288 
			
			 South West of England 1999–2000: 24,754 19,877 
			 Regional Development 2000–01: 68,989 28,830 
			 Agency 2001–02:110,965 27,741 
			  2002–03: 184,280 31,782 
			  2003–04: 263,465 29,583 
			
			 Yorkshire Forward 1999–2000:41,666 20,833 
			  2000–01: 82,623 20,655 
			  2001–02: 83,549 23,871 
			  2002–03: 70,561 20,160 
			  2003–04: 82,992 23,712

Disconnections

Martin Caton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 
	(1)  if she will make a statement on actions being taken by (a) Ofgem and (b) industry to minimise disconnections made in error;
	(2)  what assessment she has made of the impact of energy disconnections for debt;
	(3)  how many household (a) gas and (b) electricity disconnections were made in each year from 2000; and how many were made in error in each case in each year.

Stephen Timms: Disconnection remains an appropriate action of last resort where a customer has repeatedly failed to respond to efforts to secure payment or to make specific repayment arrangements. However, this power must be subject to appropriate safeguards. I welcome the arrangements proposed by Ofgem and energy suppliers in April to improve those safeguards to protect   vulnerable customers. The total number of disconnections for debt between 2000 and 2003 was:
	
		
			  Gas Electricity Total 
		
		
			 2000 16,500 300 16,800 
			 2001 26,088 375 26,463 
			 2002 21,780 995 22,775 
			 2003 15,973 1,361 17,334 
		
	
	Ofgem does not collect data about disconnections made in error. Such disconnections are plainly unacceptable. If the hon. Member or other have information about such cases, they should provide the evidence to Energywatch, which is responsible for investigating complaints against gas and electricity suppliers. Energywatch may provide evidence to, and recommend regulatory action by, Ofgem.

European Research Council

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how close to the market the research is in which the European Research Council will be involved.

Patricia Hewitt: The possible establishment of a European Research Council is still at an early stage, and no proposal has yet been made by the European Commission, but it should not detract from the more directly industry-oriented research, historically funded by the Framework Programme. The Government are currently consulting about the matter as part of its overall consultation on Framework Programme 7, a copy has been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Fireworks Ban

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on her proposals to ban category 4 fireworks from consumer sale.

Gerry Sutcliffe: holding answer 19 May 2004
	The supply of category 4 fireworks to the general public was banned in 1997 with the coming into force of the Fireworks (Safety) Regulations. Only fireworks professionals may purchase this type of firework.
	Additionally, under these Regulations only fireworks that comply with the British Standard—BS 7114—are to be supplied to ordinary consumers.

Insolvency

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many cases have been handled by the Insolvency Service Protracted Realisations Unit in each year since 1998; what the (a) gross and (b) net flow of cases was in each year; and what the average professional fee charged by an insolvency practitioner handling a protracted realisations unit case during that time was.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Protracted Realisations Unit was created in October 1999, the figures in the table list how many cases had been handled in each year by the Unit from October 1999 to 31 March 2004.
	
		
			 Year to 31 March B/fwd Input Sent to IPs Closings C/fwd 
		
		
			 1999 None — — — — 
			 September 1999 to 31 March 2000 33,027 1,355 519 1,724 32,139 
			 2001 32,139 4,727 1,382 3,205 32,279 
			 2002 32,279 3,816 1,926 3,303 30,866 
			 2003 30,866 3,816 2,762 5,078 26,842 
			 2004 26,842 1,566 3,876 3,200 21,332 
			 Total — 15,280 10,465 16,510 — 
		
	
	The Insolvency Service does not hold details of the average Insolvency Practitioner fee for handling a protracted realisations unit case. The fees are charged by the Insolvency Practitioner which may vary on a case-by-case basis.

International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on (a) the siting and (b) cost sharing of the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor.

Stephen Timms: The international partners are trying to reach a compromise on the two proposed locations for ITER that will be acceptable to the whole ITER partnership. Currently the €4.5 billion budget for the construction of the ITER facility is to be shared as follows:
	
		
			  Percentage € 
		
		
			 Europe or Japan as host 48 2.2 billion 
			 Europe or Japan as non-host 12 540 million 
			 US 10 450 million 
			 China 10 450 million 
			 Russia 10 450 million 
			 South Korea 10 450 million 
		
	
	This is likely to change if more countries join the ITER partnership.

International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what level of fusion research funding she will make available after the decision on the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor has been taken; and if she will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: Funding for the UK's national fusion programme is determined by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, which took over this function in April 2003. It is currently in the region of £16 million per year. Europe's participation in ITER will be funded through the Framework Programme.

Mail Services

Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions her Department has had with (a) Royal Mail and (b) Postwatch on the disappearance of mail.

Stephen Timms: DTI Ministers and officials meet representatives from the Royal Mail and Postwatch on a regular basis to discuss a wide range of issues, including quality of service and lost mail.

Nuclear Installations

Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on the operation to date of the Sellafield MOX plant.

Stephen Timms: The Sellafield Mox Plant (SMP) is currently undergoing plutonium commissioning prior to meeting its first overseas orders. I understand from BNFL that various technical challenges, which are not unduly surprising in such a sophisticated plant, are being addressed by the company.

Post Office

Bill O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when she last discussed the question of deprived wards with reference to the application of the urban reinvention programme by Post Office Ltd.; and what interpretation the Post Office uses of the term deprived ward; and if she will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: In accordance with the recommendations of the Performance and Innovation Unit's year 2000 report 'Counter Revolution—Modernising the Post Office Network', the Government have provided support for post offices in deprived urban areas of England in the form of the Deprived Urban Post Office Fund administered by the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Similar   schemes are administered by the devolved Administrations of Scotland and Wales while the merits of such a scheme are being considered in Northern Ireland. I announced on 5 February details of changes agreed by Post Office Ltd. and Postwatch to the current programme to restructure the post office network in urban areas which includes clarification of criteria to define exceptional circumstances under which Post Office Ltd. might propose to close a post office branch in a deprived urban area without an alternative within a half a mile. I understand that the Post Office uses the Indices of Deprivation 2000 to define its interpretation of an urban deprive ward.

Sellafield

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for   Trade and Industry what timescale is being applied   to the decommissioning of the B30 ponds at Sellafield.

Stephen Timms: HSE's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) has issued a number of Specifications for remediation activities at Sellafield.
	A Specification issued by NII in 2000, requires BNFL to retrieve at least 90 per cent. of the potentially mobile intermediate level radioactive waste sludge from the B30 ponds and bays by 2010.
	BNFL is continuing work to develop detailed plans necessary to meet that deadline.

Winkleigh Biomass Project

John Burnett: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much direct or indirect expenditure by (a) central Government and (b) regional development agencies (i) has been incurred and (ii) is planned in connection with the proposed Winkleigh Biomass Project; and on what the expenditure was or will be incurred.

Jacqui Smith: holding answer 29 April 2004
	In relation to payments by the Department and the South West of England Regional Development Agency (SWRDA), the information requested was set out in the answer provided by my hon. Friend the Minister for State for Energy, E-Commerce and Postal Services on 11 March 2004, Official Report, column 1674W.
	The grant undertaking awarded under the Bioenergy Capital Grants Scheme will provide £11.05 million conditional on successful construction and commissioning of the plant.
	The funding approved by the South West of England Regional Development Agency (SWRDA) is to support the costs of feasibility studies (an Environmental Impact Assessment, a Biomass Study and an Economic Impact Assessment) and associated technical studies. These do not commit the Agency to any further expenditure. In addition SWRDA has bought land which, if the project were to go ahead, could be resold to the project at open market value.
	I am not aware that any other Regional Development Agency or Department has made any payments to this project or has any plans to do so.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Council Tax

Edward Davey: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost to (a) the Valuation Office Agency, (b) the Valuation Tribunals and (c) central Government of administering (i) council tax and (ii) council tax benefit was in financial year 2001–02.

Nick Raynsford: The information is as follows:
	(a) (i) The Valuation Office Agency (VGA) budget for council tax costs in 2001–02 was £13.3 million,
	(ii) The VGA does not deal with council tax benefit cases.
	(b) The cost of Valuation Tribunals administering council tax is not separately identified. The overall expenditure of the valuation tribunal in 2001–02 was £9.31 million.
	(c) The Government are responsible for the policy and legislation rather than the administration of council tax and council tax benefit.

Council Tax Revaluation

Edward Davey: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the estimated cost to (a) his Department, (b) the Valuation Office Agency and (c) other Government agencies and bodies was of council tax revaluation forfinancial years (i) 2003–04, (ii) 2005–06 and (iii) 2006–07.

Nick Raynsford: The information is as follows:
	(a) The cost of council tax revaluation for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is not separately identified.
	(b) The Valuation Office Agency estimated council tax revaluation costs are:
	(i) 2003–04 is £7.6 million;
	(ii) 2005–06 is £50.2 million, and
	(iii) 2006–07 is £50.5 million.
	(c) The cost of council tax revaluation for the Valuation Tribunal Service is not significant for these years. Some preparation work will be required in 2005–06 and 2006–07 but this is not separately identified.

Departmental Officials

Jim Cousins: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which   former officials of the Department have asked for   permission to join (a) PricewaterhouseCoopers, (b) Deloitte & Touche, (c) Ernst & Young and (d) KPMG.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was created on 29 May 2002. Since that date there have been no requests from former officials seeking permission to join PricewaterhouseCoopers, Deloitte & Touche, Ernst & Young and KPMG.

Departmental Officials

Jim Cousins: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what secondments (a) PricewaterhouseCoopers, (b) Deloitte & Touche, (c) Ernst & Young and (d) KPMG has made to his Department since 2001; for what (i) periods and (ii) tasks the secondments were made; whether secondments of staff from his Department have been made to those firms; and for what (A) periods and (B) tasks.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was created on 29 May 2002. Since that date   there has been one inward secondment from PricewaterhouseCoopers, and none from the other organisations specified. The inward secondee, working in Local Government Efficiency Unit, started work in September 2001 and their secondment ended on 31 March 2004.
	No staff from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister have been seconded to any of the organisations specified.
	Secondments are part of the Interchange Initiative which promotes the exchange of people and good practice between the civil service and other organisations. Before an Interchange can occur all parties must be satisfied that no conflict of interests arises.

Employment Agencies

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the employment agencies which his Department and its predecessors have used to supply temporary staff in each financial year since 1996–97 to the most recent date for which figures are available.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was created on 29 May 2002. The Office has contracts for the supply of temporary staff with three recruitment agencies: Adecco, Brook Street and Reed. These contracts were awarded as a result of an invitation to tender by the Office.

Fire Service

Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans the Government have for inter-brigade co-operation in the Fire Service in the event of a serious emergency.

Nick Raynsford: The Government are keen to ensure a co-ordinated response from the fire and rescue service in the event of a major emergency. That is why all fire and rescue authorities have been invited to sign a Mutual Aid Agreement, which will enable individual fire and rescue authorities to ask for assistance from another authority in the event of a serious emergency.
	The development of the Mutual Aid Agreement forms part of the Government's commitment to improving resilience and the fire and rescue service's response to a major incident. The Fire and Rescue Services Bill, currently progressing through Parliament, should make such an agreement easier to establish in future as it will extend authorities' ability to enter into mutual reinforcement schemes to include new duties such as responding to the increased terrorist threat.
	The Government have also established the New Dimension programme, which will help to ensure a co-ordinated response to any terrorist incidents on a national scale by providing suitable equipment and training to deal with such incidents. A national co-ordination centre is being established in order to provide central command and control when the New Dimension equipment is utilised. This will remain in place until such time as the regional control rooms are operational, when they will direct resources on a regional basis.

Housing

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether his Community Housing Task Force has yet been integrated within the Government office network; how many of its staff are (a) civil servants and (b) consultants; and what services they provide to local authorities whose tenants have voted to reject the Government's three options for council house privatisation.

Keith Hill: From 1 June, the Task Force advisers will be allocated to their respective Government office regions and will fall under the line management of their respective Government office housing directors. The practical arrangements are being agreed and formalised.
	There are 13 civil servants on fixed term contracts and three on secondments arrangements from local authorities and the National Housing Federation. There are no consultants working in the task force.
	Where tenants have rejected the options to deliver the decent homes target, the Community Housing Task Force will continue to support local authorities and its tenants to investigate other options within the decent home policy framework to achieve decent homes by 2010.

Housing

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  for what reasons North East Lincolnshire was not granted the full sum for gap funding for its housing transfer for which it had applied; what assessment he has made of the effect this has on the business plans for the new housing association; and what plans he has to make supplementary gap funding available to North East Lincolnshire under the new arrangements for gap funding for areas of negative equity;
	(2)  whether the supplementary gap funding he announced in the week beginning 10 May for housing transfers in areas with negative equity will be made available to North East Lincolnshire.

Keith Hill: North East Lincolnshire sought £6 million, £2 million annually for three years, from the Yorkshire and Humber Regional Housing Board transitional commissioning as gap funding to cover the negative valuation of its stock to enable its Large Scale Voluntary Transfer (LSVT) proposal to proceed. The Board has agreed in principle to such a level of funding, with years two and three subject to the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review. It has invited the Council to submit a final proposal by 4 June 2004 with a view to the Board making its final decision on 14 July 2004. Discussions will take place with the Board as to whether there is merit for their commitment to be absorbed within the central gap funding arrangements.

Housing

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what councils, how many houses and how much land have been admitted to the Stock Transfer programme for each year since 2002–03; how many applied for inclusion; and what assessment he has made of what this means for future financing of councils which submit proposals by his deadline of July 2005.

Keith Hill: The following lists and tables show those councils which have applied for and/or been granted places on the Large Scale Voluntary Transfer (LSVT) programmes since 2002 and also the number of dwellings involved.
	The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister does not hold information on how much land has been involved in stock transfer.
	Local authorities transferring their housing stock under the LSVT programmes will have no impact on the   future financing of social housing in other local authorities.
	Names of local authorities granted places on LSVT programmes since 2002:
	2002 programme
	Amber Valley
	Bromsgrove
	Cannock Chase
	Cherwell
	Forest of Dean
	London Borough of Ealing
	London Borough of Hackney
	London Borough of Islington
	London Borough of Southwark
	Liverpool County Council
	Maidstone Borough Council
	Manchester City Council
	Middlesbrough Council
	North Hertfordshire
	Nuneaton and Bedworth
	Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
	Rushcliffe Borough Council
	Scarborough Borough Council
	Sheffield City Council
	Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
	South Norfolk Council
	Stockport
	Teignbridge
	Worcester.
	2003 programme
	Copeland
	Forest Heath District Council
	Hartlepool Borough Council
	London Borough of Barking and Dagenham
	London Borough of Hackney
	London Borough of Islington
	London Borough of Lambeth
	London Borough of Tower Hamlets
	Manchester City Council
	Middlesbrough
	North East Lincolnshire
	Peterborough County Council
	Purbeck District Council
	Royal Borough of Kingston
	South Norfolk
	Stroud District Council
	Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council
	Wakefield Metropolitan District Council
	Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council.
	2004 programme
	Broxbourne Borough Council
	Ellesmere Port and Neston
	Halton Borough Council
	Hyndburn
	Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council
	Lambeth
	London Borough of Tower Hamlets
	Macclesfield
	Mid Devon
	North Somerset
	Sedgefield
	Sheffield
	Stafford Borough Council
	West Lancashire District Council.
	
		Number of dwellings granted places on LSVT programmes since 2002
		
			 Programme Number 
		
		
			 2002 180,794 
			 2003 123,543 
			 2004 76,052 
		
	
	Names of local authorities applying for places on LSVT programmes since 2002:
	2002 programme
	Amber Valley Borough Council
	Bromsgrove District Council
	Cannock Chase
	Cherwell District Council
	Copeland Borough Council
	Forest of Dean District Council
	London Borough of Hackney
	London Borough of Islington
	London Borough of Southwark
	Liverpool County Council
	Maidstone
	Manchester Council
	Middlesbrough Council
	North Hertfordshire
	Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council
	Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
	Rushcliffe Borough Council
	Scarborough Borough Council
	Sheffield County Council
	Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
	South Norfolk Council
	Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
	Teignbridge District Council
	Worcester.
	2003 programme
	Forest Heath District Council
	Hartlepool Borough Council
	London Borough of Barking and Dagenham
	London Borough of Hackney
	London Borough of Islington
	London Borough of Lambeth
	London Borough of Tower Hamlets
	Manchester City Council
	Middlesbrough
	North East Lincolnshire
	Peterborough County Council
	Purbeck District Council
	Royal Borough of Kingston
	Stroud District Council
	Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council
	Wakefield Metropolitan District Council
	Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council.
	2004 programme
	Broxbourne Borough Council
	Copeland
	Ellesmere Port and Neston
	Halton Borough Council
	Hyndburn
	Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council
	Lambeth
	London Borough of Tower Hamlets
	Macclesfield
	Manchester City Council
	Mid Devon
	North Norfolk
	North Somerset
	Preston
	Sedgefield
	Sheffield
	Stafford Borough Council
	Teesdale
	West Lancashire District Council
	
		Number of dwellings applying for places on LSVT programmes since 2002
		
			 Programme Number 
		
		
			 2002 180,794 
			 2003 125,806 
			 2004 115,063

Housing

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what (a) support, (b) advice and (c) guidance his officials have provided to North East Lincolnshire in connection with its campaign for the large-scale voluntary transfer of its housing stock; what estimate he has made of the cost of (i) staff time, (ii) travel and (iii) other expenditure in connection with such support, advice and guidance; and how much of that cost is payable by North East Lincolnshire.

Keith Hill: As with any local authority on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Disposals Programme, North East Lincolnshire council have discussed their stock transfer proposals with officials of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister at each stage of the process, including seeking advice and guidance on all public consultation material. We make no specific estimate of the cost of staff time, travel or other expenditure in connection with the giving of support, advice or guidance to any particular local authority. No payment has been made by the council for any advice or support.

Land Developers

Tom Watson: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what advice is given to local authorities on how best to assess whether developers have sought brownfield site alternatives before proposing back land development.

Keith Hill: Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: "Housing" (PPG3) says that the country's housing needs should be met in the most sustainable way possible, giving priority to re-using suitable brownfield land in preference to the development of greenfield sites. PPG3 advises local planning authorities, in preparing their local plans, to adopt a systematic approach to assessing the development potential of sites and the redevelopment of existing buildings, deciding which are most suitable for housing development and the sequence in which development should take place. It is for local planning authorities to consider whether proposals for back land development are in principle consistent with the local plan (or where this is not up-to-date, the relevant criteria set out in PPG3) and are well-designed.

Local Authorities Complaints Fees

Bob Spink: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister 
	(1)  if he will restrict the maximum fee which a local authority can   charge persons who make a complaint against a nuisance hedge grower to £100;
	(2)  when he will report on his consultation on the maximum fee which a local authority can charge persons who wish to make a complaint against a nuisance hedge grower.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will not be deciding the maximum fee which local authorities will be able to charge people making a   complaint about a nuisance high hedge until we have   analysed the responses to the current public consultation on implementing Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. The consultation period runs until 30 June. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister expects to report the results of the consultation and to bring the legislation into operation towards the end of 2004.

Local Authority Leisure Services

Andy Reed: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what   estimate he has made of the saving to local authorities of contracting out leisure services to the private sector.

Phil Hope: The information requested is not held centrally, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Press Officers

David Laws: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many press officers were employed in his Department in   each year from 1990–91 to 2003–04; what the total   cost was in each year; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was created on 29 May 2002.
	On 1 April 2003, ODPM(c) employed 21.8 full-time equivalent press officers. Salary costs for the period 1 June 2002 to 31 March 2003 were £0.86 million.
	On 1 March 2004, 23 full-time equivalent press officers were employed. Salary costs for the period 1 April 2003 to 29 February 2004 were £0.96 million.

Regional Government

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the total cost to his Department was of the event on elected regional assemblies held in Barrow on 5 May 2004; how many staff from his Department were involved; how many staff from Government Office North West were involved; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the speech delivered by the Minister for Local and Regional Government.

Nick Raynsford: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister estimates that the Barrow hearing cost £3,900. This includes costs associated with venue hire and catering. Four members of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and three members of the Government office for the north-west were involved.
	As on previous occasions, I spoke extempore, rather than from a prepared text.

Register of Interests

Bob Spink: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the requirements are on officials in his Department to declare current interests; and what register of interests is kept for his departmental officials.

Yvette Cooper: The Civil Service Management Code sets out the general principles and rules governing the conduct of civil servants declaring any conflict of interest. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Staff Handbook states that staff are required to seek permission from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister before undertaking any activity that might result in a conflict of interest and all applications are kept on file.

Timber Purchases

Barry Gardiner: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how (a) the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, (b) its regional offices, (c) the Fire Service College, (d) the Ordnance Survey, (e) the Planning Inspectorate, (f) the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre and (g) the Rent Service monitor and audit purchases of timber and   timber products to ensure that they meet the Department's stated commitment to being obtained from legal and sustainable sources.

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, its regional offices and its agencies are committed to the Government Policy on the purchase of Legal and Sustainable forested wood and this is fully   supported in our Greening Operations Policy Statement.
	Contracts where the use of timber and timber based products is anticipated, contain clauses that require the supplier to actively seek legally sourced and sustainable timber and to supply physical evidence that supports this. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has the use of framework contracts for the purchase of furniture, which are subject to supply chain audit by officials.
	Timber and timber based products have been adopted within the certificated and independently audited Environmental Management Systems which the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has developed to manage our response to the "Framework for Sustainable Development on the Government Estate".
	It is expected that Government targets associated with Timber Procurement will be published in the coming months and officials in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will be incorporating this into our procurement processes.
	Although the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has overall responsibility for the buildings occupied by Government Offices, they carry out functions on behalf of 10 Departments.